Evidence Hub

Effects of silver diamine fluoride in human dentin: A systematic review of in vitro studies

Andressa Cardoso Amorim, Allyne Jorcelino Daloia de Carvalho, M. Carvalho, Meire Coelho Ferreira, V. R. Novais

European Journal of Oral Sciences, 2025

2 citations

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effects of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) on dentin in permanent teeth. Eight databases (PubMed, SciELO, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, Science Direct, LILACS, and Livivo) and three "gray literature" sources (Open Access Theses and Dissertations [OATD], Open Grey, and ProQuest) were used. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and methodology quality was assessed using the QUIN tool. The review included in vitro studies investigating the effect of 38% SDF on demineralized permanent dentin. The primary outcomes were findings from energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and X-ray diffraction (XRD) approaches, while secondary outcomes included findings from hardness testing, micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), and scanning electron microscopy. From 16,630 results, 17 studies met the eligibility criteria. After treatment with 38% SDF, significant increases were observed in the levels of calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) in dentin. Higher mineral/matrix ratios and a significantly lower amide I/HPO2- ratio were identified, using FITR, in groups treated with SDF. Restoration of dentin crystallinity in groups treated with SDF, with sharp peaks for silver chloride and silver, were shown using XRD. Micro-computed tomography revealed reduced lesion depth, while scanning electron microscopy showed smoother surfaces…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in cell cultures (in vitro), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free