# Comparative Chemical and Physical Characterization of Biomimetic Versus Commercial Hydroxyapatites for Tooth Enamel Repair

## TL;DR

This study compares different types of hydroxyapatites used for repairing tooth enamel and finds that a biomimetic version performs best in forming enamel-like coatings.

## Contribution

The study provides a direct comparison of commercial hydroxyapatites and identifies a biomimetic variant with superior enamel repair potential.

## Key findings

- Biomimetic Zn–carbonate-substituted HAp showed the highest enamel surface coverage (99.90%) in vitro.
- Commercial HAp variants differed in crystallinity, carbonate substitution, and particle size.
- Post-treatment Ca/P ratios approached those of natural dental enamel for the most effective HAp.

## Abstract

Background: Substituted hydroxyapatites (HAps) are widely used in oral-care formulations for enamel repair; however, head-to-head comparisons among commercial grades remain limited. Objective: To compare four commercial HAps: A (Kal-HAp), B (FL-HAp), C (FL-HAp-SC), and D (microRepair®, a biomimetic Zn–carbonate-substituted HAp) and to evaluate their ability to form an enamel-like coating in vitro. Methods: We characterized the powders by X-ray diffraction (crystalline phase, Landi crystallinity index), FTIR-ATR (phosphate/carbonate bands), SEM/EDS (morphology, surface Ca/P), and DLS (particles size, ζ-potential). In vitro, human enamel sections were treated with 5% slurries in artificial saliva; surface coverage was quantified by image analysis on SEM. Results: All commercial materials analyzed in this work were composed of HAp. Differences were observed between HApin terms of crystallinity-range [2 Theta 8.0–60.0°], carbonate substitution (ATR [carbonate group evaluated −870 cm−1]), and particle size (DLS [in a range 0.1–10,000 nm], Z-mean [mV]). On enamel, all samples form a hydroxyapatite layer; coverage differed between groups ([A] 28.83 ± 7.35% vs. [B] 31.11 ± 3.12% vs. [C] 57.20 ± 33.12% vs. [D] 99.90 ± 0.12%), with the biomimetic Zn–carbonate-substituted HAp showing the highest coverage, and the post-treatment Ca/P ratio approached values similar to those of dental enamel. Conclusions: Complementary physic-chemical signatures (crystallinity, carbonate substitution, and morphology) relate to enamel-surface coverage in vitro, providing evidence base for selecting HAp grades for enamel-repair formulations, which is a practical implication for product design.