surface hardness of cem cement and cold ceramic cement across different ph settings

Objective: this study aimed to assess the surface microhardness of calcium-enriched mixture cement (cem) and cold ceramic (cc) cement after being cured in environments with different ph values.methods: sixty maxillary canines were obtained. their roots were cut below the cementoenamel junction (cej) to create root dentin blocks with a height of 3 mm. the internal space of the canal was then prepared with a peeso reamer. the specimens were filled with either cem (group 1) or cc (group 2) cement (n=30). the groups were further divided into three subgroups (n=10), each was wrapped in gauze soaked in one of the following solutions: a) distilled water (ph=7.4), b) buffered butyric acid (ph=4.4), or c) potassium hydroxide (ph=10.4). the samples were incubated at 37°c for one week. afterwards, the vickers surface microhardness of specimens was measured and compared between groups and subgroups using a two-way anova (α=0.05).results: the microhardness values of both cements showed significant differences depending on the environmental conditions (p<0.05). the highest microhardness was observed in the alkaline environment, with cc cement measuring 60.32 ± 3.16 and cem cement measuring 53.57 ± 2.09. the microhardness of both materials reduced significantly in the acidic environment (p<0.05). cc cement demonstrated significantly higher surface microhardness than cem cement in neutral and alkaline environments (p=0.001 for both), but the two groups showed comparable microhardness in the acidic environment (p=0.51).conclusions: cc cement showed greater microhardness than cem cement in neutral and alkaline environments. both cements exhibit reduced hardness in the acidic condition.