OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity during in-office and at-home bleaching in adult patients. The efficacy of dental bleaching was also evaluated. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed in the MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Brazilian Library in Dentistry, Cochrane Library, and System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe without restrictions. The annual conference of the International Association for Dental Research abstracts (1990-2014) and unpublished and ongoing trials registry were also searched. Dissertations and theses were searched using the ProQuest Dissertations and Periódicos Capes Theses databases. Only randomized clinical trials that compared the prevalence or intensity of tooth sensitivity during in-office and at-home bleaching in adult patients were included and studies that evaluated the efficacy of these dental bleaching techniques, in terms of shade guide units (ΔSGU) and in terms of color difference measured with a spectrophotometer (ΔE*). RESULTS: After the removal of duplicates, 1139 articles were identified. After title and abstract screening, 29 studies remained. Fifteen studies were further excluded, whereas 12 studies remained for qualitative analyses and 8 for the meta-analysis of the primary and secondary outcomes. No significant difference in the risk/intensity of tooth sensitivity or in bleaching efficacy was observed in the present study. CONCLUSION: In an overall comparison of at-home and in-office bleaching, no differences were detected, either regarding risk/intensity of tooth sensitivity or the effectiveness of the bleaching treatment. This comparison, however, does not take into consideration variations in the protocols (daily usage time, number of bleaching sessions, and product concentration) of the bleaching techniques in the studies included.
OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity during in-office and at-home bleaching in adult patients. The efficacy of dental bleaching was also evaluated. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed in the MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Brazilian Library in Dentistry, Cochrane Library, and System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe without restrictions. The annual conference of the International Association for Dental Research abstracts (1990-2014) and unpublished and ongoing trials registry were also searched. Dissertations and theses were searched using the ProQuest Dissertations and Periódicos Capes Theses databases. Only randomized clinical trials that compared the prevalence or intensity of tooth sensitivity during in-office and at-home bleaching in adult patients were included and studies that evaluated the efficacy of these dental bleaching techniques, in terms of shade guide units (ΔSGU) and in terms of color difference measured with a spectrophotometer (ΔE*). RESULTS: After the removal of duplicates, 1139 articles were identified. After title and abstract screening, 29 studies remained. Fifteen studies were further excluded, whereas 12 studies remained for qualitative analyses and 8 for the meta-analysis of the primary and secondary outcomes. No significant difference in the risk/intensity of tooth sensitivity or in bleaching efficacy was observed in the present study. CONCLUSION: In an overall comparison of at-home and in-office bleaching, no differences were detected, either regarding risk/intensity of tooth sensitivity or the effectiveness of the bleaching treatment. This comparison, however, does not take into consideration variations in the protocols (daily usage time, number of bleaching sessions, and product concentration) of the bleaching techniques in the studies included.
Authors: E C Martini; S O Parreiras; A L Szesz; F M Coppla; A D Loguercio; Alessandra Reis Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2019-05-18 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Laís G Bernardi; Michael W Favoreto; Taynara S Carneiro; Alexandra Mena-Serrano; Christiane P F Borges; Alessandra Reis; Alessandro D Loguercio Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 3.606