Efficacy of In-Office Bleaching Using 35% Hydrogen Peroxide in an Attachable Syringe Varying the Application Tip: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial.
{"title":"Efficacy of In-Office Bleaching Using 35% Hydrogen Peroxide in an Attachable Syringe Varying the Application Tip: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Gabrielle Gomes Centenaro, Laryssa Mylenna Madruga Barbosa, Leticia Condolo, Marina Kravchychyn Cappelletti, Alessandro D Loguercio","doi":"10.1111/jerd.70277","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This randomized clinical trial evaluated the bleaching efficacy (BE), absolute risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS), gingival irritation (GI), and esthetic self-perception (ES) of an in-office bleaching gel with an attachable syringe using different application tips in a randomized, double-blind (participant- and evaluator-blinded) clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty-five participants received hemi-arch bleaching using an attached brush and a conventional tip, performed in two sessions with hydrogen peroxide 35%. BE was evaluated at baseline, weekly, and 1-month post-bleaching using a spectrophotometer (ΔE<sub>ab</sub>, ΔE<sub>00</sub>, and ΔWI<sub>D</sub>) and shade guide units (ΔSGU). The absolute risk and intensity of TS and GI using a VAS. ES was assessed using the Orofacial Esthetic Scale. BE was analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA. TS and GI were evaluated using the McNemar test (absolute risk) or paired t-test (intensity and ES scores; α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>BE was observed for both groups, with no statistical difference (p > 0.05) across all parameters. The absolute and intensity of TS were comparable between brush and conventional tip (p > 0.05). ES was improved after bleaching (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The application tips showed equivalent bleaching efficacy and esthetic self-perception, as well as similar tooth sensitivity and gingival irritation.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>The brush applicator tip preserved bleaching efficacy while minimizing the volume of gel applied to the tooth surface, making it a more sustainable alternative.</p>","PeriodicalId":15988,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.70277","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This randomized clinical trial evaluated the bleaching efficacy (BE), absolute risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS), gingival irritation (GI), and esthetic self-perception (ES) of an in-office bleaching gel with an attachable syringe using different application tips in a randomized, double-blind (participant- and evaluator-blinded) clinical trial.
Materials and methods: Forty-five participants received hemi-arch bleaching using an attached brush and a conventional tip, performed in two sessions with hydrogen peroxide 35%. BE was evaluated at baseline, weekly, and 1-month post-bleaching using a spectrophotometer (ΔEab, ΔE00, and ΔWID) and shade guide units (ΔSGU). The absolute risk and intensity of TS and GI using a VAS. ES was assessed using the Orofacial Esthetic Scale. BE was analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA. TS and GI were evaluated using the McNemar test (absolute risk) or paired t-test (intensity and ES scores; α = 0.05).
Results: BE was observed for both groups, with no statistical difference (p > 0.05) across all parameters. The absolute and intensity of TS were comparable between brush and conventional tip (p > 0.05). ES was improved after bleaching (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: The application tips showed equivalent bleaching efficacy and esthetic self-perception, as well as similar tooth sensitivity and gingival irritation.
Clinical significance: The brush applicator tip preserved bleaching efficacy while minimizing the volume of gel applied to the tooth surface, making it a more sustainable alternative.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry (JERD) is the longest standing peer-reviewed journal devoted solely to advancing the knowledge and practice of esthetic dentistry. Its goal is to provide the very latest evidence-based information in the realm of contemporary interdisciplinary esthetic dentistry through high quality clinical papers, sound research reports and educational features.
The range of topics covered in the journal includes:
- Interdisciplinary esthetic concepts
- Implants
- Conservative adhesive restorations
- Tooth Whitening
- Prosthodontic materials and techniques
- Dental materials
- Orthodontic, periodontal and endodontic esthetics
- Esthetics related research
- Innovations in esthetics