Polydorou Olga, Scheitza Sophia, Spraul Mathias, Vach Kirstin, Hellwig Elmar
Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, Center for Dental Medicine, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Institute for Medical Biometry and Statistics, Center for Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Stefan-Meier-Str. 26, 79104, Freiburg, Germany.
Odontology. 2018 Jan;106(1):64-72. doi: 10.1007/s10266-017-0308-3. Epub 2017 May 25.
The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the long-term effect of bleaching on human enamel. Four groups of enamel specimens were prepared (n = 20): group 1: bleaching with Opalescence Boost [40% hydrogen peroxide (HO), 3 × 20 min/week]; group 2: control group (the specimens were stored in human saliva); group 3: beaching with Vivastyle Paint on Plus (6% HO, 2 × 10 min/day), and group 4: bleaching with Opalescence PF 16% [16% carbamide peroxide (CP), 6 h/day]. After each bleaching session the specimens were stored in human saliva. Knoop microhardness and surface roughness were measured: before bleaching, after 2-week and after 8-week bleaching. After 2-week treatment, surface roughness was significantly increased in all experimental groups (p < 0.05), while among them no significant difference was found (p > 0.05). The roughness changes exerted after 8-week bleaching were not significantly higher than the ones after 2 weeks (p > 0.05). After 8-week treatment, the increase in roughness caused by 16% CP was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the one caused by 40% HO. Microhardness increased in all groups including control; however, only 40% HO increased the microhardness significantly (p < 0.05). The effect of bleaching on enamel was not shown to be dependent on the method or the HO concentration. Bleaching with CP 16% resulted in higher roughness than bleaching with HO, while 40% HO caused the higher microhardness increase. The present study showed that in-office bleaching with 40% HO seems to be at least as safe as home bleaching as far as their effects on human enamel are concerned.
本体外研究的目的是评估漂白对人牙釉质的长期影响。制备了四组牙釉质标本（n = 20）：第1组：使用Opalescence Boost [40%过氧化氢（HO），每周3次，每次20分钟]进行漂白；第2组：对照组（标本储存在人唾液中）；第3组：使用Vivastyle Paint on Plus [6% HO，每天2次，每次10分钟]进行漂白，第4组：使用Opalescence PF 16% [16%过氧化脲（CP），每天6小时]进行漂白。每次漂白后，将标本储存在人唾液中。测量努氏显微硬度和表面粗糙度：在漂白前、漂白2周后和8周后进行测量。经过2周治疗后，所有实验组的表面粗糙度均显著增加（p < 0.05），但各实验组之间未发现显著差异（p > 0.05）。8周漂白后产生的粗糙度变化并不显著高于2周后的变化（p > 0.05）。经过8周治疗后，16% CP引起的粗糙度增加显著高于40% HO引起的增加（p < 0.05）。所有组包括对照组的显微硬度均增加；然而，只有40% HO显著增加了显微硬度（p < 0.05）。未显示漂白对牙釉质的影响取决于方法或HO浓度。与HO漂白相比，16% CP漂白导致更高的粗糙度，而40% HO导致更高的显微硬度增加。本研究表明，就对人牙釉质的影响而言，40% HO的诊室漂白似乎与家庭漂白至少一样安全。
