In vitro assessment of chemical activation efficiency during in-office dental bleaching

23Citations
Citations of this article
54Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: This study compared five types of chemical catalyzing agents added to 35% hydrogen peroxide gel, with regard to their capacity of intensifying in-office dental bleaching results. Methods: One-hundred and twenty bovine incisors were used, of which the crowns and roots were cut in the incisor-apical direction, to acquire the dimensions of a human central incisor. The specimens were sectioned in the mesiodistal direction by means of two longitudinal cuts, the lingual halves being discarded. The vestibular halves received prophylaxis with a bicarbonate jet, ultrasound cleaning and acid etching on the dentinal portion. Next, the specimens were stored in receptacles containing a 25% instant coffee solution for two weeks. After the darkening period, initial measurement of the shade obtained was taken with the Easy Shade appliance, which allowed it to be quantified by the CIELab* method. The samples were divided into six groups, corresponding to the chemical activator used: a) none (CON); b) ferric chloride (CF); c) ferrous sulphate (SF); d) manganese gluconate (GM); e) manganese chloride (CM); f) mulberry root extract (RA). Each group received three 10-minute applications of the gels containing the respective activating agents. Next, a new shade measurement was made. Results: The Analysis of Variance and Tukey tests (α=5%) showed statistically significant differences for the shade perception values (p=0.002). Groups GM, CM and RA showed significantly higher means than the control group. Conclusion: The presence of some chemical activators is capable of resulting in a significant increase in tooth shade variation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Travassos, A. C., Torres, C. R. G., Borges, A. B., & Barcellos, D. C. (2010). In vitro assessment of chemical activation efficiency during in-office dental bleaching. Operative Dentistry, 35(3), 287–294. https://doi.org/10.2341/09-256-L

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free