Machado Lucas Silveira, Anchieta Rodolfo Bruniera, dos Santos Paulo Henrique, Briso André Luiz, Tovar Nick, Janal Malvin N, Coelho Paulo Guilherme, Sundfeld Renato Herman
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2016 Mar-Apr;36(2):251-60. doi: 10.11607/prd.2383.
The objective of this split-mouth clinical study was to compare a combination of in-office and at-home dental bleaching with at-home bleaching alone. Two applications of in-office bleaching were performed, with one appointment per week, using 38% hydrogen peroxide. At-home bleaching was performed with or without in-office bleaching using 10% carbamide peroxide in a custom-made tray every night for 2 weeks. The factor studied was the bleaching technique on two levels: Technique 1 (in-office bleaching combined with home bleaching) and Technique 2 (home bleaching only). The response variables were color change, dental sensitivity, morphology, and surface roughness. The maxillary right and left hemiarches of the participants were submitted to in-office placebo treatment and in-office bleaching, respectively (Phase 1), and at-home bleaching (Phase 2) treatment was performed on both hemiarches, characterizing a split-mouth design. Enamel surface changes and roughness were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy and optical interferometry using epoxy replicas. No statistically significant differences were observed between the bleaching techniques for either the visual or the digital analyses. There was a significant difference in dental sensitivity when both dental bleaching techniques were used, with in-office bleaching producing the highest levels of dental sensitivity after the baseline. Microscopic analysis of the morphology and roughness of the enamel surface showed no significant changes between the bleaching techniques. The two techniques produced similar results in color change, and the combination technique produced the highest levels of sensitivity. Neither technique promoted changes in morphology or surface roughness of enamel.
这项半口临床研究的目的是比较诊室与家庭联合牙齿漂白和单纯家庭牙齿漂白的效果。使用38%的过氧化氢进行了两次诊室漂白，每周就诊一次。无论是否进行诊室漂白，家庭漂白均使用10%的过氧化脲，每晚在定制托盘内进行，持续2周。研究因素为两个水平的漂白技术：技术1（诊室漂白与家庭漂白相结合）和技术2（仅家庭漂白）。反应变量为颜色变化、牙齿敏感度、形态和表面粗糙度。参与者的上颌右半侧和左半侧牙弓分别接受诊室安慰剂治疗和诊室漂白（第一阶段），然后对两侧牙弓均进行家庭漂白（第二阶段）治疗，形成半口设计。使用环氧树脂复制品，通过扫描电子显微镜和光学干涉测量法分析牙釉质表面变化和粗糙度。在视觉分析和数字分析中，两种漂白技术之间均未观察到统计学上的显著差异。两种牙齿漂白技术在牙齿敏感度方面存在显著差异，诊室漂白在基线后产生的牙齿敏感度最高。牙釉质表面形态和粗糙度的微观分析表明，两种漂白技术之间无显著变化。两种技术在颜色变化方面产生了相似的结果，联合技术产生的敏感度最高。两种技术均未导致牙釉质形态或表面粗糙度的改变。
