OBJECTIVE: To compare the bleaching efficacy and tooth sensitivity (TS) of two hydrogen peroxide (HP) concentrations (20% and 35%) used for in-office bleaching associated or not with a light-emitting diode (LED)/laser light activation. METHOD:Seventy-seven patients with a right maxillary canine darker than A3 were selected for this single-blind randomized trial. The participants were distributed in four groups: bleaching with 35% HP, 35% HP + LED/laser, 20% HP, and 20% HP + LED/laser. The anterior teeth were bleached in two sessions, using a 35% or 20% HP gel with a one-week interval. Each session had three applications of 15 minutes. For the light-activated groups, the LED/laser energy (Whitening Laser Light Plus, DMC) was employed according to the manufacturer's instructions. The color change was evaluated by subjective and objective methods. Participants recorded TS with five-point verbal and visual analog scales. Color change in ΔE was evaluated by analysis of variance and Tukey tests (α=0.05) and in ΔSGU with Kruskall-Wallis and Dunn test. The absolute risk of TS and TS intensity were evaluated by Fisher exact test and Kruskall-Wallis test, respectively (α=0.05). RESULTS: All groups achieved the same level of whitening, except for the 20% HP group, which showed the lowest degree of whitening in the subjective analysis. The use of light did not increase the absolute risk or intensity of TS. No significant difference among groups was observed when color changes were assessed with the spectrophotometer. CONCLUSION: According to the value-oriented shade guide, the use of LED/laser light activation was able to increase the degree of whitening of the 20% HP group, but this association was not useful for the 35% HP gel. The spectrophotometer, however, did not detect significant differences among groups.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the bleaching efficacy and tooth sensitivity (TS) of two hydrogen peroxide (HP) concentrations (20% and 35%) used for in-office bleaching associated or not with a light-emitting diode (LED)/laser light activation. METHOD: Seventy-seven patients with a right maxillary canine darker than A3 were selected for this single-blind randomized trial. The participants were distributed in four groups: bleaching with 35% HP, 35% HP + LED/laser, 20% HP, and 20% HP + LED/laser. The anterior teeth were bleached in two sessions, using a 35% or 20% HP gel with a one-week interval. Each session had three applications of 15 minutes. For the light-activated groups, the LED/laser energy (Whitening Laser Light Plus, DMC) was employed according to the manufacturer's instructions. The color change was evaluated by subjective and objective methods. Participants recorded TS with five-point verbal and visual analog scales. Color change in ΔE was evaluated by analysis of variance and Tukey tests (α=0.05) and in ΔSGU with Kruskall-Wallis and Dunn test. The absolute risk of TS and TS intensity were evaluated by Fisher exact test and Kruskall-Wallis test, respectively (α=0.05). RESULTS: All groups achieved the same level of whitening, except for the 20% HP group, which showed the lowest degree of whitening in the subjective analysis. The use of light did not increase the absolute risk or intensity of TS. No significant difference among groups was observed when color changes were assessed with the spectrophotometer. CONCLUSION: According to the value-oriented shade guide, the use of LED/laser light activation was able to increase the degree of whitening of the 20% HP group, but this association was not useful for the 35% HP gel. The spectrophotometer, however, did not detect significant differences among groups.
Authors: Juliana L de Geus; Flávio L Beltrame; Mei Wang; Bharathi Avula; Ikhlas A Khan; Alessandro D Loguercio; Stella Kossatz; Alessandra Reis Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 3.573