AIMS: Carbamide peroxide (CP) containing bleaching agents are now widely used in different concentrations. In this study, the effect of 10% and 15% CP containing home bleaching agents on the surface roughness and morphology of human enamel and dentine were evaluated in vitro. METHODS:90 non-carious human mandibular incisors were divided randomly into two equal groups (enamel and dentine). The dentine group specimens were ground to expose dentine surfaces. The samples in both groups were then randomly divided into three main groups and then divided into three subgroups, according to bleaching application times (n=15). The samples in both enamel and dentine groups were treated with 10% CP at Group 1 and 4, 15% CP at Group 2 and 5 and distilled water at Group 3 and 6. The surface roughness of the samples was analysed before bleaching (1a, 2a, 3a for enamel, 4a, 5a, 6a for dentine), after 4hr (1b, 2b, 3b for enamel, 4b, 5b, 6b for dentine) and after 28hr of bleaching application (1c, 2c, 3c for enamel, 4c, 5c, 6c for dentine) using a computerised roughness tester. The surface morphologies of treated and control specimens were also examined by SEM. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the surface roughness of untreated control specimens and the specimens treated with the bleaching materials (10% and 15% CP) for both enamel and dentine at any given measurement time (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Under the careful guidance of a dentist, home bleaching can be thought a reliable treatment for both stained enamel and dentine, regardless of whether 10% or 15% CP is used.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: Carbamide peroxide (CP) containing bleaching agents are now widely used in different concentrations. In this study, the effect of 10% and 15% CP containing home bleaching agents on the surface roughness and morphology of human enamel and dentine were evaluated in vitro. METHODS: 90 non-carious human mandibular incisors were divided randomly into two equal groups (enamel and dentine). The dentine group specimens were ground to expose dentine surfaces. The samples in both groups were then randomly divided into three main groups and then divided into three subgroups, according to bleaching application times (n=15). The samples in both enamel and dentine groups were treated with 10% CP at Group 1 and 4, 15% CP at Group 2 and 5 and distilled water at Group 3 and 6. The surface roughness of the samples was analysed before bleaching (1a, 2a, 3a for enamel, 4a, 5a, 6a for dentine), after 4hr (1b, 2b, 3b for enamel, 4b, 5b, 6b for dentine) and after 28hr of bleaching application (1c, 2c, 3c for enamel, 4c, 5c, 6c for dentine) using a computerised roughness tester. The surface morphologies of treated and control specimens were also examined by SEM. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the surface roughness of untreated control specimens and the specimens treated with the bleaching materials (10% and 15% CP) for both enamel and dentine at any given measurement time (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Under the careful guidance of a dentist, home bleaching can be thought a reliable treatment for both stained enamel and dentine, regardless of whether 10% or 15% CP is used.
Authors: R R Moraes; J L M Marimon; L F J Schneider; L Correr Sobrinho; G B Camacho; M Bueno Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2005-11-16 Impact factor: 3.573