Bueno Esteves L M, de Souza Costa C A, de Oliveira Ribeiro R A, Seicento Aidar K M, de Oliveira Santos A, Catelan A, Dos Santos P H, Briso Alf
Lara Maria Bueno Esteves, DDS, MS, PhD student, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (UNESP) School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil.
Carlos Alberto de Souza Costa, DDS, MS, PhD, associate professor, Department of Physiology and Pathology, School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brazil.
Oper Dent. 2025 May 1;50(3):262-273. doi: 10.2341/24-090-C.
To compare conventional hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) whitening therapy (CT) applied for 45 minutes with a test therapy (TT) containing H2O2 whitening gel and catalyst bioproducts applied for 15 minutes.
Thirty patients and their hemiarches were randomly divided into two groups: CT: application of 35% H2O2 three times for 15 minutes; test therapy (TT): based on the prior application of a polycaprolactone scaffold and the addition of 10 mg of peroxidase to the 35% whitening gel (3 drops of thickener, 9 drops of peroxide and 10 mg of peroxidase) for an exposure time of 15 minutes.The two treatments were carried out in three whitening sessions, 7 days apart. The chromatic change (ΔE00) and the bleaching index (ΔWID) were analyzed by spectrophotometry. Spontaneous sensitivity was assessed through a questionnaire, and thermal sensitivity was provoked through thermal stimuli after the three sessions and 14 days later. Esthetic self-perception was also measured using the Orofacial Esthetics Scale before and after each session.
After the first session, CT exceeded TT in ΔE00 and ΔWID, whereas they were equal at the other time points. Greater intensity and occurrence of spontaneous sensitivity occurred in the first and second sessions with CT. The CT group experienced thermal sensitivity at higher temperatures than the TT group at all times analyzed. Esthetic self-perception was higher (66.6%) in the TT group.
The test therapy can achieve the same whitening effect with less total exposure time and less tooth sensitivity than the conventional technique.
比较应用45分钟的传统过氧化氢(H2O2)美白疗法(CT)与应用含H2O2美白凝胶和催化剂生物制品15分钟的试验疗法(TT)。
30例患者及其半侧牙弓被随机分为两组:CT组:应用35% H2O2三次,每次15分钟;试验疗法(TT)组:在先前应用聚己内酯支架的基础上,向35%美白凝胶中添加10mg过氧化物酶(3滴增稠剂、9滴过氧化物和10mg过氧化物酶),暴露时间为15分钟。两种治疗均分三次美白疗程进行,每次间隔7天。通过分光光度法分析色度变化(ΔE00)和漂白指数(ΔWID)。通过问卷调查评估自发敏感性,并在三个疗程后及14天后通过热刺激激发热敏感性。每次疗程前后还使用口腔美学量表测量美学自我认知。
在第一个疗程后,CT组的ΔE00和ΔWID超过TT组,而在其他时间点两者相等。CT组在第一和第二个疗程中出现的自发敏感性强度和发生率更高。在所有分析时间点,CT组比TT组在更高温度下出现热敏感性。TT组的美学自我认知更高(66.6%)。
试验疗法与传统技术相比,能在总暴露时间更短且牙齿敏感性更低的情况下达到相同的美白效果。