Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41535666›Full record

ArticleOdontology2026

Effects of dry mouth lozenges on the surface morphology and color stability of restorative materials.

Aslı Aşık, Sibel Acar, Dilşah Çoğulu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Odontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Aslı AşıkDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, İzmir Tınaztepe University, İzmir, Turkey. asli.asik@tinaztepe.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4865-3249
Sibel AcarDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, İzmir Tınaztepe University, İzmir, Turkey.
Dilşah ÇoğuluDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesLozenges are frequently recommended to stimulate saliva for patients suffering from dry mouth to improve the quality of their lives. This study aimed to investigate the effects of dry mouth lozenges with varying acidity levels on the color stability and surface morphology of resin-based restorative materials. MATERIALS AND

methodsEighty specimens, comprising a composite (n = 40) and a compomer (n = 40), were prepared using a standardized mold. The baseline color (T0) of each specimen was measured using the CIE (L*,a*,b*) color assessment system with Vita Easy Shade Compact. The specimens were then divided into eight groups: Group-1: Composite-ACT, Group-2: Composite-TheraBreath, Group-3: Composite-Biotene, Group-4: Composite-Xylimelts, Group-5: Compomer-ACT, Group-6: Compomer-TheraBreath, Group-7: Compomer-Biotene, and Group-8: Compomer-Xylimelts. Each lozenge was dissolved in 10 mL of distilled water, and the pH of the solutions was measured using a pH meter. Over a period of one week, the specimens were immersed in the respective lozenge solutions within Eppendorf tubes, and color measurements were repeated on the seventh day (T1). Subsequently, the color changes (ΔE*) over time were statistically analyzed. Randomly selected specimens from each group were examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) after 7 days to evaluate surface morphology. For the statistical analysis, a significance level of p < 0.05 was applied.

resultsThe pH levels of the dry mouth lozenges tested were as follows: ACT (8.53), TheraBreath (3.55), Biotene (5.34), and Xylimelts (8.14). After 7 days, the color change (ΔE) in the groups was recorded as: G1 (4.06 ± 2.29), G2 (2.63 ± 1.67), G3 (5.97 ± 4.32), G4 (4.34 ± 3.00), G5 (12.76 ± 2.73), G6 (15.53 ± 5.06), G7 (11.09 ± 4.70), and G8 (4.85 ± 1.77). The two-way ANOVA revealed a significant interaction between restorative material and lozenge type (p < 0.001). Compomer materials exhibited significantly greater color change than composite materials when exposed to ACT, TheraBreath, and Biotene lozenges (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between materials with Xylimelts lozenge (p > 0.05). Among compomers, Xylimelts caused significantly less discoloration compared to other lozenges, while composite materials showed no significant color changes across different lozenge types.

conclusionThe choice of restorative material is critical for pediatric patients who use dry mouth lozenges. This study demonstrates that while composite resins maintained stable color regardless of the lozenge type, compomers were highly susceptible to discoloration when exposed to certain lozenges. Therefore, composite resin is a more reliable choice for esthetic restorations in patients using these specific lozenge products.

Indexed as

AcidityColor stabilityDry mouthSaliva substituteSpectrophotometrySurface morphology

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.