三种商用室内漂白剂对人牙釉质化学和显微硬度变化的体外评价。

IF 3.1 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Berivan Laura Rebeca Buzatu, Atena Galuscan, Ramona Dumitrescu, Roxana Buzatu, Magda Mihaela Luca, Octavia Balean, Gabriela Vlase, Titus Vlase, Iasmina-Mădălina Anghel, Carmen Opris, Bianca Ioana Todor, Mihaela Adina Dumitrache, Daniela Jumanca
{"title":"三种商用室内漂白剂对人牙釉质化学和显微硬度变化的体外评价。","authors":"Berivan Laura Rebeca Buzatu, Atena Galuscan, Ramona Dumitrescu, Roxana Buzatu, Magda Mihaela Luca, Octavia Balean, Gabriela Vlase, Titus Vlase, Iasmina-Mădălina Anghel, Carmen Opris, Bianca Ioana Todor, Mihaela Adina Dumitrache, Daniela Jumanca","doi":"10.3390/dj13080357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: In-office bleaching commonly employs high concentrations of hydrogen peroxide (HP) or carbamide peroxide (CP), which may compromise enamel integrity. This in vitro paired-design study aimed to compare the chemical and mechanical effects of three commercial bleaching agents-Opalescence Boost (40% HP), Opalescence Quick (45% CP), and BlancOne Ultra+ (35% HP)-on human enamel. The null hypothesis assumed no significant differences between the control and treated samples. Given the ongoing debate over pH, active ingredients, and enamel impact, comparing whitening systems remains clinically important. <b>Methods</b>: Forty-two extracted teeth were assigned to three experimental groups (<i>n</i> = 14) with matched controls. Each underwent a single bleaching session per manufacturer protocol: Opalescence Boost (≤60 min), Opalescence Quick (15-30 min), and BlancOne Ultra+ (three light-activated cycles of 8-10 min). Enamel chemical changes were analyzed by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (phosphate and carbonate bands), and surface hardness by Vickers microhardness testing. Paired <i>t</i>-tests (α = 0.05) assessed statistical significance. <b>Results</b>: FTIR analysis revealed alterations in phosphate and carbonate bands for all agents, most notably for Opalescence Boost and BlancOne Ultra+. Microhardness testing showed significant reductions in enamel hardness for Opalescence Boost (control: 37.21 ± 1.74 Hv; treated: 34.63 ± 1.70 Hv; <i>p</i> = 0.00) and Opalescence Quick (control: 45.82 ± 1.71 Hv; treated: 39.34 ± 1.94 Hv; <i>p</i> < 0.0001), whereas BlancOne Ultra+ showed no significant difference (control: 51.64 ± 1.59 HV; treated: 51.60 ± 2.34 Hv; <i>p</i> = 0.95). <b>Conclusions</b>: HP-based agents, particularly at higher concentrations, caused greater enamel alterations than CP-based products. While clinically relevant, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to in vitro limitations and natural enamel variability.</p>","PeriodicalId":11269,"journal":{"name":"Dentistry Journal","volume":"13 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12385387/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In Vitro Evaluation of Chemical and Microhardness Alterations in Human Enamel Induced by Three Commercial In-Office Bleaching Agents.\",\"authors\":\"Berivan Laura Rebeca Buzatu, Atena Galuscan, Ramona Dumitrescu, Roxana Buzatu, Magda Mihaela Luca, Octavia Balean, Gabriela Vlase, Titus Vlase, Iasmina-Mădălina Anghel, Carmen Opris, Bianca Ioana Todor, Mihaela Adina Dumitrache, Daniela Jumanca\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/dj13080357\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: In-office bleaching commonly employs high concentrations of hydrogen peroxide (HP) or carbamide peroxide (CP), which may compromise enamel integrity. This in vitro paired-design study aimed to compare the chemical and mechanical effects of three commercial bleaching agents-Opalescence Boost (40% HP), Opalescence Quick (45% CP), and BlancOne Ultra+ (35% HP)-on human enamel. The null hypothesis assumed no significant differences between the control and treated samples. Given the ongoing debate over pH, active ingredients, and enamel impact, comparing whitening systems remains clinically important. <b>Methods</b>: Forty-two extracted teeth were assigned to three experimental groups (<i>n</i> = 14) with matched controls. Each underwent a single bleaching session per manufacturer protocol: Opalescence Boost (≤60 min), Opalescence Quick (15-30 min), and BlancOne Ultra+ (three light-activated cycles of 8-10 min). Enamel chemical changes were analyzed by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (phosphate and carbonate bands), and surface hardness by Vickers microhardness testing. Paired <i>t</i>-tests (α = 0.05) assessed statistical significance. <b>Results</b>: FTIR analysis revealed alterations in phosphate and carbonate bands for all agents, most notably for Opalescence Boost and BlancOne Ultra+. Microhardness testing showed significant reductions in enamel hardness for Opalescence Boost (control: 37.21 ± 1.74 Hv; treated: 34.63 ± 1.70 Hv; <i>p</i> = 0.00) and Opalescence Quick (control: 45.82 ± 1.71 Hv; treated: 39.34 ± 1.94 Hv; <i>p</i> < 0.0001), whereas BlancOne Ultra+ showed no significant difference (control: 51.64 ± 1.59 HV; treated: 51.60 ± 2.34 Hv; <i>p</i> = 0.95). <b>Conclusions</b>: HP-based agents, particularly at higher concentrations, caused greater enamel alterations than CP-based products. While clinically relevant, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to in vitro limitations and natural enamel variability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dentistry Journal\",\"volume\":\"13 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12385387/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dentistry Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13080357\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dentistry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13080357","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的:办公室漂白通常使用高浓度的过氧化氢(HP)或过氧化脲(CP),这可能会损害牙釉质的完整性。这项体外配对设计研究旨在比较三种商用漂白剂——Opalescence Boost (40% HP)、Opalescence Quick (45% CP)和BlancOne Ultra+ (35% HP)对人类牙釉质的化学和机械作用。原假设假定对照和处理样本之间没有显著差异。考虑到目前关于pH值、活性成分和牙釉质影响的争论,比较美白系统在临床上仍然很重要。方法:将42颗拔牙分为3个实验组(n = 14),并与对照组相匹配。每一种产品都进行了一次漂白:Opalescence Boost(≤60分钟)、Opalescence Quick(15-30分钟)和BlancOne Ultra+(3次光激活周期,8-10分钟)。采用傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR)(磷酸盐和碳酸盐波段)分析釉质化学变化,采用维氏显微硬度测试分析釉质表面硬度。配对t检验(α = 0.05)评价差异有统计学意义。结果:FTIR分析显示,所有药物的磷酸盐和碳酸盐带都发生了变化,最明显的是Opalescence Boost和BlancOne Ultra+。显微硬度测试显示,Opalescence Boost组(对照组:37.21±1.74 Hv,处理组:34.63±1.70 Hv, p = 0.00)和Opalescence Quick组(对照组:45.82±1.71 Hv,处理组:39.34±1.94 Hv, p < 0.0001)的牙釉质硬度显著降低,而BlancOne Ultra+组(对照组:51.64±1.59 Hv,处理组:51.60±2.34 Hv, p = 0.95)的牙釉质硬度差异无统计学意义。结论:HP-based agents,特别是在较高浓度时,比CP-based products造成更大的牙釉质改变。虽然临床相关,但由于体外局限性和天然牙釉质的变异性,结果应谨慎解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

In Vitro Evaluation of Chemical and Microhardness Alterations in Human Enamel Induced by Three Commercial In-Office Bleaching Agents.

In Vitro Evaluation of Chemical and Microhardness Alterations in Human Enamel Induced by Three Commercial In-Office Bleaching Agents.

In Vitro Evaluation of Chemical and Microhardness Alterations in Human Enamel Induced by Three Commercial In-Office Bleaching Agents.

In Vitro Evaluation of Chemical and Microhardness Alterations in Human Enamel Induced by Three Commercial In-Office Bleaching Agents.

Background/Objectives: In-office bleaching commonly employs high concentrations of hydrogen peroxide (HP) or carbamide peroxide (CP), which may compromise enamel integrity. This in vitro paired-design study aimed to compare the chemical and mechanical effects of three commercial bleaching agents-Opalescence Boost (40% HP), Opalescence Quick (45% CP), and BlancOne Ultra+ (35% HP)-on human enamel. The null hypothesis assumed no significant differences between the control and treated samples. Given the ongoing debate over pH, active ingredients, and enamel impact, comparing whitening systems remains clinically important. Methods: Forty-two extracted teeth were assigned to three experimental groups (n = 14) with matched controls. Each underwent a single bleaching session per manufacturer protocol: Opalescence Boost (≤60 min), Opalescence Quick (15-30 min), and BlancOne Ultra+ (three light-activated cycles of 8-10 min). Enamel chemical changes were analyzed by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (phosphate and carbonate bands), and surface hardness by Vickers microhardness testing. Paired t-tests (α = 0.05) assessed statistical significance. Results: FTIR analysis revealed alterations in phosphate and carbonate bands for all agents, most notably for Opalescence Boost and BlancOne Ultra+. Microhardness testing showed significant reductions in enamel hardness for Opalescence Boost (control: 37.21 ± 1.74 Hv; treated: 34.63 ± 1.70 Hv; p = 0.00) and Opalescence Quick (control: 45.82 ± 1.71 Hv; treated: 39.34 ± 1.94 Hv; p < 0.0001), whereas BlancOne Ultra+ showed no significant difference (control: 51.64 ± 1.59 HV; treated: 51.60 ± 2.34 Hv; p = 0.95). Conclusions: HP-based agents, particularly at higher concentrations, caused greater enamel alterations than CP-based products. While clinically relevant, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to in vitro limitations and natural enamel variability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Dentistry Journal
Dentistry Journal Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
213
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信