Effect of different cariostatic agents on the surface roughness and color change of CAD–CAM‐milled restorative materials: An in vitro comparative study

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the influence of different cariostatic agents: 38% silver diamine fluoride (SDF), 38% SDF + potassium iodide (RS), and nano silver fluoride (NSF) compared with distilled water (control), on the surface roughness and color change of CAD–CAM‐milled restorative materials: nanoceramic resin (NR), feldspathic ceramic (FC), and lithium disilicate ceramic (LD). Materials and Methods Thirty‐two specimens of each material were fabricated and allocated into four experimental groups ( n = 8). The specimens underwent repeated applications of the cariostatic agents (3 min, repeated six times) and were evaluated for surface roughness (∆Ra) by profilometry and for color change using a digital spectrophotometer, with analysis based on the CIEDE2000 system (∆ E 00 ). Data were analyzed using two‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by one‐way ANOVA or Kruskal–Wallis tests with appropriate post hoc comparisons and Bonferroni correction ( α = 0.05). Results A statistically significant interaction was observed between restorative material type and the applied cariostatic agent. SDF produced the greatest increases in roughness, especially in LD (∆Ra = 0.232) and FC (∆Ra = 0.126), compared with the control group ( p < 0.001), and color‐change values far above clinically acceptable thresholds (∆ E 00 = 30.56–45.72; p < 0.001). Potassium iodide application after SDF (RS) showed low color change across all restorative materials (∆ E 00 = 0.28–0.75) and increased roughness in the FC. NSF showed behavior similar to the control group in terms of roughness and maintained color‐change values within acceptable limits (∆ E 00 = 0.57–1.35). Conclusions SDF may compromise the surface roughness and color change of CAD–CAM‐milled restorative materials, whereas NSF and RS show potential as more favorable alternatives for the evaluated outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Prosthodontics
Published
2026-10-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.70240
Primary Topic
Dental materials and restorations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Effect of different cariostatic agents on the surface roughness and color change of CAD–CAM‐milled restorative materials: An in vitro comparative study

Gabriela Queiroz de Melo Monteiro, André Galembeck, Luís Felipe Espíndola‐Castro, Jacksuel Azevedo Melo et al.
Journal of Prosthodontics
Dental materials and restorations
article

Effect of different cariostatic agents on the surface roughness and color change of CAD–CAM‐milled restorative materials: An in vitro comparative study

Gabriela Queiroz de Melo Monteiro, André Galembeck, Luís Felipe Espíndola‐Castro, Jacksuel Azevedo Melo, Emanuel Ewerton Mendonça Vasconcelos, Fernanda Donida Ortigoza, Vitória Mendes Souza e Melo
article en

Abstract

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the influence of different cariostatic agents: 38% silver diamine fluoride (SDF), 38% SDF + potassium iodide (RS), and nano silver fluoride (NSF) compared with distilled water (control), on the surface roughness and color change of CAD–CAM‐milled restorative materials: nanoceramic resin (NR), feldspathic ceramic (FC), and lithium disilicate ceramic (LD). Materials and Methods Thirty‐two specimens of each material were fabricated and allocated into four experimental groups ( n = 8). The specimens underwent repeated applications of the cariostatic agents (3 min, repeated six times) and were evaluated for surface roughness (∆Ra) by profilometry and for color change using a digital spectrophotometer, with analysis based on the CIEDE2000 system (∆ E 00 ). Data were analyzed using two‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by one‐way ANOVA or Kruskal–Wallis tests with appropriate post hoc comparisons and Bonferroni correction ( α = 0.05). Results A statistically significant interaction was observed between restorative material type and the applied cariostatic agent. SDF produced the greatest increases in roughness, especially in LD (∆Ra = 0.232) and FC (∆Ra = 0.126), compared with the control group ( p < 0.001), and color‐change values far above clinically acceptable thresholds (∆ E 00 = 30.56–45.72; p < 0.001). Potassium iodide application after SDF (RS) showed low color change across all restorative materials (∆ E 00 = 0.28–0.75) and increased roughness in the FC. NSF showed behavior similar to the control group in terms of roughness and maintained color‐change values within acceptable limits (∆ E 00 = 0.57–1.35). Conclusions SDF may compromise the surface roughness and color change of CAD–CAM‐milled restorative materials, whereas NSF and RS show potential as more favorable alternatives for the evaluated outcomes.

Journal of Prosthodontics
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (BR), Universidade de Pernambuco (BR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Dental materials and restorations
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.