Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026
An In Vitro and In Vivo Assessment of Acidogenicity of Several Alcoholic and Non-Alcoholic Beverages.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Guazzo Riccardo, Bressan Eriberto, Lehrkinder Anna, Campus Guglielmo, Stellini Edoardo, Tomasi Cristiano, Lingström Peter
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the acidogenic potential of selected alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages using complementary in vitro (initial pH and titratable acidity) and in vivo (tooth-surface pH after exposure) methods.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two sparkling wines (traditional and tank method), red wine, white wine, an alcoholic soft drink, a non-alcoholic soft drink, pilsner beer, and orange juice were examined. In vitro, initial pH and titratable acidity were measured at room temperature (22°C). In vivo, 19 healthy adults held 10 mL of each selected beverage intraorally for 1 min, after which tooth-surface pH was recorded at predefined time points for up to 30 min using a microelectrode. Data were analyzed using ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey tests (p < 0.05).
RESULTS: In vitro, the non-alcoholic soft drink had the lowest initial pH and beer the highest. Orange juice and sparkling wine produced by the traditional method showed the greatest titratable acidity. All beverages except water caused an immediate in vivo pH decrease, followed by recovery toward baseline within 10-15 min. The lowest mean tooth-surface pH was 6.2 for the traditional-method sparkling wine.
CONCLUSIONS: Alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages differed substantially in their acidogenic properties. Salivary buffering promoted rapid pH recovery, but beverages with high titratable acidity, particularly traditional-method sparkling wine and orange juice, produced a more sustained acid challenge. Because this study measured short-term pH responses rather than dental hard-tissue loss, the findings should be interpreted as indicators of acidogenicity rather than direct measures of erosive damage.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two sparkling wines (traditional and tank method), red wine, white wine, an alcoholic soft drink, a non-alcoholic soft drink, pilsner beer, and orange juice were examined. In vitro, initial pH and titratable acidity were measured at room temperature (22°C). In vivo, 19 healthy adults held 10 mL of each selected beverage intraorally for 1 min, after which tooth-surface pH was recorded at predefined time points for up to 30 min using a microelectrode. Data were analyzed using ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey tests (p < 0.05).
RESULTS: In vitro, the non-alcoholic soft drink had the lowest initial pH and beer the highest. Orange juice and sparkling wine produced by the traditional method showed the greatest titratable acidity. All beverages except water caused an immediate in vivo pH decrease, followed by recovery toward baseline within 10-15 min. The lowest mean tooth-surface pH was 6.2 for the traditional-method sparkling wine.
CONCLUSIONS: Alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages differed substantially in their acidogenic properties. Salivary buffering promoted rapid pH recovery, but beverages with high titratable acidity, particularly traditional-method sparkling wine and orange juice, produced a more sustained acid challenge. Because this study measured short-term pH responses rather than dental hard-tissue loss, the findings should be interpreted as indicators of acidogenicity rather than direct measures of erosive damage.