Influence of Aerated Drink, Mouthwash, and Simulated Gastric Acid on the Surface Roughness of Dental Ceramics: A Comparative Study.

Background: Dental ceramics are known for their natural appearance and their durable chemical and optical properties, and their uses mainly reflect their excellent aesthetic properties, biocompatibility and resistance to wear. In addition, dental ceramics are considered to be chemically inert restorative material with large differences in the chemical compositions and microstructures. Although ceramics exhibit excellent physical properties and biocompatibility, the oral environment presents a series of external factors that affect its physical and mechanical properties in its long term function.

Aims And Objectives: The aim of this study is to compare and evaluate the surface roughness of 2 dental ceramics (Noritake & IPS Emax ceram) before and after exposure to an aerated drink, a mouthwash and simulated vomit solution with distilled water.

Materials And Methods: 128 ceramic discs were made, 16 for each of the 4 groups of 2 ceramics to be tested. It was fabricated in the form of discs of diameter 10 mm × 2 mm thickness. The test specimens were calibrated by grinding, using a medium grit diamond bur. Both the above specimens were divided into 4 groups of 16 each. They were then subjected to test solutions. Each specimen in a group was immersed in the following solutions: Coca-Cola, chlorhexidine mouthwash, simulated vomit solution and distilled water.

Results: The results analyzed statistically using one way ANOVA (analysis of variance), paired t test and independent test.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that the surface roughness of the evaluated ceramics increased upon exposure to Coca-Cola, chlorhexidine mouthwash and simulated vomit solution. Simulated vomit solution caused the maximum change in surface roughness followed by coca cola and then chlorhexidine mouthwash. No changes were observed after immersion in distilled water. Noritake showed slightly more resistance to change in surface profile when compared to IPS e.max.