Effect of Aspartame to Prevent Enamel Erosion by Citric/hydrochloric Acids

Objectives: Light cola, which contains aspartame, presents less erosive potential compared to its traditional version. The anti-erosive potential of aspartame, regardless of its association with colas, has not been evaluated. The aim of this in situ study was to evaluate whether aspartame regular mouthwash would be able to prevent enamel erosion when used prior to the erosive challenges with citric or hydrochloric acids.
Methods: This randomized, single blind in situ study was conducted with 3 crossover phases. Polished bovine enamel blocks (n=240) were random divided among 6 groups/ 3 phases/ 20 volunteers: GAc and GAh- 0.024% of aspartame in deionized water (experimental groups), GCc and GCh- deionized water (negative-control) and GSc and GSh- Sn-containing solution (Elmex® Erosion Protection Dental Rinse; positive-control). In the in situ protocol the volunteers rinsed their mouth (10ml, 60s) with one of the solutions (in each phase) prior to immersion of half of the intraoral appliance in 0.05M citric acid and the other half in 0.01M hydrochloric acid for 120s. These procedures was repeated 4x/day with 2h interval for 5 days. The response variable was profilometry and data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey’s test (p<0.05).
Results: No difference on enamel loss was found between aspartame (GAc/GAh) and deionized water(GCc/GCh). Sn-containing solution (GSc /GSh) resulted in less enamel loss compared to deionized water (GCc/GCh). Regarding the type of acid, hydrochloric acid (GAh/ GCh/GSh) resulted in higher enamel loss than citric acid (GAc/GCc/GSc).
Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, the aspartame was not able to prevent the enamel loss when used before an erosive challenge independently of type of acid. Hydrochloric acid promoted higher enamel loss than citric acid.