Department of Restorative Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022 Apr;34(3):490-502. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12827. Epub 2021 Oct 8.
To answer the question: "Does the peroxide gel application regimen (single application vs. renewal) influence the efficacy and the tooth sensitivity outcomes of in-office tooth bleaching?"
The search was done in Pubmed, Cochrane, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE in February 2021 (updated in July 2021). Randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing the single application vs. the renewal protocols of HP were included. The meta-analyses were performed for the objective (ΔE ), subjective (ΔSGU) color changes, and absolute risk of tooth sensitivity (TS). Heterogeneity was evaluated using Q test (I ). Cochrane Collaboration tool assessed the risk of bias (RoB). The GRADE evaluated the certainty of evidence.
Five RCT studies remained. Two studies showed high RoB, and three presented some concerns. No significant differences were observed between the protocols in terms of the ΔE , ΔSGU, and TS. ΔE exhibited substantial heterogeneity (I = 87%), while ΔSGU (I = 60%) and the TS (I = 62%) presented a moderate one. The certainty of evidence was considered low or very low, depending on the variable response and the evaluation time.
The application regimen (single vs. renewal of HP) did not impact color change or the absolute risk of TS.
The renewal of bleaching gel during the in-office appointment may not be necessary. However, there is at least a low certainty of evidence. Because of this, further randomized clinical trials with appropriate methodology on this topic are encouraged.
回答问题:“过氧化物凝胶应用方案(单次应用与更新)是否会影响诊室牙齿美白的疗效和牙齿敏感结果?”
于 2021 年 2 月在 Pubmed、Cochrane、LILACS、Scopus、Web of Science 和 EMBASE 进行检索(2021 年 7 月更新)。纳入比较 HP 单次应用与更新方案的随机临床试验(RCT)。对客观(ΔE)、主观(ΔSGU)颜色变化和牙齿敏感(TS)绝对风险进行 meta 分析。使用 Q 检验(I )评估异质性。Cochrane 协作工具评估偏倚风险(RoB)。GRADE 评估证据确定性。
保留了 5 项 RCT 研究。其中两项研究存在高 RoB,三项研究存在一些关注。在 ΔE、ΔSGU 和 TS 方面,两种方案之间未观察到显著差异。ΔE 表现出显著的异质性(I ²=87%),而 ΔSGU(I ²=60%)和 TS(I ²=62%)表现出中度异质性。根据变量反应和评估时间,证据确定性被认为是低或极低。
应用方案(HP 的单次应用与更新)不影响颜色变化或 TS 的绝对风险。
在诊室就诊期间更新漂白凝胶可能不是必需的。然而,证据确定性至少为低。因此,鼓励进一步开展关于该主题的具有适当方法学的随机临床试验。