AIM: To determine the efficacy of Ceramir, a modified glass ionomer cement and a surfactant mono-n-dodecyl phosphate in remineralization of dentin around root caries restorations. MATERIALS & METHODS: 45 permanent intact teeth were embedded in self-cured dental acrylic resin to expose buccal or lingual surfaces. The buccal/lingual surfaces were wet ground with carbide paper, final polishing were accomplished with aluminum to obtain highly polished dentin surface. Baseline Knoop micro hardness values were recorded. All specimens were then etched using 37% phosphoric acid for 5 seconds to demineralize dentin and to expose dentin collagen. The Knoop indenter micro hardness measurements were again performed for each sample four indentations in dentin surface within an area of 75 μm. The mean of Knoop microhardness was calculated. Cavities, 6.35 mm width and 3 mm depth were prepared within the etched area of each tooth with round carbide bur. Samples were divided into 4 groups: 2 samples used as control with no restoration, 13 samples were restored with plain Ceramir, 13 sample were restored with Ceramir containing 2% mono-n-dodecyl phosphate restoration and 13 samples were restored with Ceramir containing 5% mono-n-dodecyl phosphate. Samples were stored in SBF a 37° C incubator. Knoop micro hardness values were recorded at a distance of 75 um from the margins of the restoration at 10,20 and 38 day intervals. RESULTS: Knoop hardness of dentin (KHN) was reduced by 33.7% after etching. Knoop hardness of dentin around Ceramir restorations returned to pre-etching levels after 10 days of restoration. There was no statistically significant difference in Knoop micro-hardness (KHN) between the plain Ceramir compared to the Ceramir with surfactant after 10 days. Also, there was no statistically significant difference between the plain Ceramir and Ceramir with 2% surfactant after 20 days. Knoop hardness around cavities restored with Plain Ceramir and Ceramir with 2% Surfactant were significantly higher than around cavities restored with Ceramir with 5% surfactant after 20 and 38 days. CONCLUSIONS: The result of this study shows that Ceramir restorations of dentin lesions lead to remineralization of dentin around the restoration margins in the area of 75 μm where the micro-indentations performed. It shows that addition of 2% surfactant to Ceramir tend to increase the remineralization over time. Toward the end of the observation period samples restored with Ceramir containing 2% surfactant appeared to remineralize at a faster rate than plain Ceramir. On the other hand addition of 5% surfactant was not beneficial as it led to a decrease in the remineralizing effect of Ceramir.