OBJECTIVE: : To evaluate, in vitro, the effect of mouth rinse exposure on bleached enamel. METHODS: : Enamel/dentin bovine blocks (4×4×2 mm) were bleached with 35% hydrogen peroxide (HP) and were submitted to immersion twice daily for 14 days with different rinses (n=10), including those involving: distilled water (C [control]), 225-ppm NaF (FM, Colgate Plax Classic), essential oil (EM, Listerine Tartar Control), 1.5% hydrogen peroxide (HPM, Colgate Plax Whitening), and 2% hydrogen peroxide, pyrophosphates, and 225-ppm NaF (HPM+P, Colgate® Luminous White). The specimens were stored in a remineralizing solution during all experiments. Analyses of color (ΔE, L*, a*, b*) and roughness (Ra) were performed at the baseline, after HP, and after exposure to the rinse. The cross-sectional microhardness (CSMH) and images by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were assessed at the end. The data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) (ΔE), repeated measures ANOVA (Ra), and split-plot ANOVA (CSMH), followed by the Tukey test. The L*, a*, and b* values were analyzed by generalized linear models (α=0.05). RESULTS: : Color changes were not statistically different in the groups. Ra increased in all groups after bleaching; however, it was reestablished in C, FM, and HPM+F and increased in EM after 14 days of the rinse. EM and HPM reduced the CSMH values differing from C and promoted alterations on the enamel surface visualized by SEM. CONCLUSION: : The mouth rinses did not affect the whitening efficacy or promote benefits on bleached enamel properties. Moreover, the 1.5% hydrogen peroxide- or essential oil-based mouth rinses affected the bleached enamel properties, promoting an alteration in morphologic surface and mineral loss in depth.
OBJECTIVE: : To evaluate, in vitro, the effect of mouth rinse exposure on bleached enamel. METHODS: : Enamel/dentin bovine blocks (4×4×2 mm) were bleached with 35% hydrogen peroxide (HP) and were submitted to immersion twice daily for 14 days with different rinses (n=10), including those involving: distilled water (C [control]), 225-ppm NaF (FM, Colgate Plax Classic), essential oil (EM, Listerine Tartar Control), 1.5% hydrogen peroxide (HPM, Colgate Plax Whitening), and 2% hydrogen peroxide, pyrophosphates, and 225-ppm NaF (HPM+P, Colgate® Luminous White). The specimens were stored in a remineralizing solution during all experiments. Analyses of color (ΔE, L*, a*, b*) and roughness (Ra) were performed at the baseline, after HP, and after exposure to the rinse. The cross-sectional microhardness (CSMH) and images by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were assessed at the end. The data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) (ΔE), repeated measures ANOVA (Ra), and split-plot ANOVA (CSMH), followed by the Tukey test. The L*, a*, and b* values were analyzed by generalized linear models (α=0.05). RESULTS: : Color changes were not statistically different in the groups. Ra increased in all groups after bleaching; however, it was reestablished in C, FM, and HPM+F and increased in EM after 14 days of the rinse. EM and HPM reduced the CSMH values differing from C and promoted alterations on the enamel surface visualized by SEM. CONCLUSION: : The mouth rinses did not affect the whitening efficacy or promote benefits on bleached enamel properties. Moreover, the 1.5% hydrogen peroxide- or essential oil-based mouth rinses affected the bleached enamel properties, promoting an alteration in morphologic surface and mineral loss in depth.