Alterations in Dental Enamel Color and Surface Characteristics Following Plaque-Disclosing Agent Application and Prophylactic Procedures


AÇIKGÖZ ALPARSLAN E., BÜYÜKGÖZE DİNDAR M., TEKBAŞ ATAY M.

Applied Sciences (Switzerland), cilt.16, sa.9, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 16 Sayı: 9
  • Basım Tarihi: 2026
  • Doi Numarası: 10.3390/app16094374
  • Dergi Adı: Applied Sciences (Switzerland)
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Compendex, INSPEC, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: dental air abrasion, dental enamel, dental plaque, dental prophylaxis, surface properties, tooth discoloration
  • Trakya Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Plaque-disclosing agents are widely used to enhance visualization of dental biofilm. However, their chromogenic components may adhere to enamel surfaces, resulting in transient extrinsic discoloration. This study evaluated the extent and short-term recovery of such discoloration and compared three removal modalities in terms of enamel color change (CIEDE2000, ΔE00), surface roughness (Ra), and gloss (GU). Extracted human anterior teeth with intact buccal enamel were stained using an erythrosine-based disclosing agent and randomly allocated into three groups (n = 15): manual brushing with conventional toothpaste, rubber-cup polishing with a perlite-containing paste (1000 rpm, 5 s), or erythritol-based air-polishing (5 s; 50% power/100% water). ΔE00 was measured at baseline, immediately after cleaning, and after 1 week of storage in artificial saliva. Ra and GU were recorded at baseline and post-cleaning. Data were analyzed using appropriate tests (p < 0.05). All modalities were associated with a reduction in visible discoloration without significantly affecting Ra or GU (p > 0.05). Immediate ΔE00 values remained above commonly reported acceptability thresholds, indicating residual discoloration. Partial color recovery occurred after artificial saliva storage. Within the limitations of this study, the findings indicate no statistically significant differences among the tested procedures, without evidence of superiority of any single modality.