Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May-Jun;66(3):75-79.

Potential erosive effect of mouthrinses on enamel and dentin

  • PMID: 29714705

Potential erosive effect of mouthrinses on enamel and dentin

Alex J Delgado et al. Gen Dent. 2018 May-Jun.

Abstract

This in vitro study measured the pH values, titratable acidity (TA), and erosive potential of commercially available mouthrinses. A pH analysis of 6 mouthrinses (Listerine Total Care, Listerine Ultraclean, Listerine Original, Crest Pro-Health, Scope Classic, and ACT Total Care) was performed using a calibrated pH meter, and the neutralizable acidity was measured by titrating the mouthwashes against 0.1 M of sodium hydroxide. A gravimetric analysis was performed by submerging human enamel and dentin specimens in 5 mL of each mouthrinse for a total of 2 weeks. Specimens were weighed on a calibrated analytical balance at baseline, 24 hours, 48 hours, 96 hours, 1 week, and 2 weeks, and finally the loss of mass was calculated. The differences in erosive potential among the 6 mouthrinses were verified using nonparametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann- Whitney). The level of significance was set at 0.05. The mouthrinses were found to have the following mean pH/ TA values: Crest Pro-Health, 7.05/0.00; ACT Total Care, 6.31/5.44; Scope Classic, 5.18/0.42; Listerine Original, 3.98/9.26; Listerine Total Care, 3.43/5.88; and Listerine Ultraclean, 3.87/10.36. A significant correlation between pH and TA was observed for this dataset (P > 0.0001). No statistically significant difference in enamel loss among the groups was observed (P = 0.0631). However, a significant difference in dentin loss was observed among the 6 mouthrinses (P = 0.0011). Within the limitations of this in vitro study, it can be concluded that some mouthrinses have a pH lower than the critical pH of enamel and dentin. There is a significant association between acidic pH values and higher TA. Some of the tested mouthrinses presented an erosive potential on dentin.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms