Journal of dentistry · 2026
Effect of in-office whitening gels acidity on tooth sensitivity, color change, and gingival irritation in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances: A randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Trovão M M, Dos Santos Acd, Alves Lmr, Tavares Rrj, Aponte-Abente N L, Reis A, Loguercio A D, Cardenas Afm, Siqueira Fsf
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare tooth sensitivity (TS), gingival irritation (GI), and bleaching effectiveness between two commercial 35% hydrogen peroxide in-office bleaching formulations characterized by acidic and neutral-to-alkaline pH profiles in patients wearing fixed orthodontic appliances during the final stabilization phase of orthodontic treatment.
METHODS: In this single-blind randomized clinical trial, 120 participants undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment were randomly allocated to receive either a 35% hydrogen peroxide bleaching gel with acidic pH (Whiteness HP Maxx) or a 35% hydrogen peroxide bleaching gel with neutral-to-alkaline pH (Whiteness HP AutoMixx Plus). Two bleaching sessions were performed at a 7-day interval. The primary outcome was the absolute risk and intensity of TS, assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included GI (VAS) and bleaching efficacy, evaluated by spectrophotometric measurements (ΔE00, ΔEab, and ΔWID) and shade guide units (ΔSGU). Data were analyzed using chi-square and independent-samples t-tests (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Participants treated with the neutral-to-alkaline formulation showed a significantly lower absolute risk of TS than those treated with the acidic formulation (55%vs. 75%; RR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.56-0.96; p = 0.02). TS intensity was also significantly lower in the neutral-to-alkaline group at multiple evaluation time points during both bleaching sessions (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between groups regarding the absolute risk or intensity of GI (p > 0.05). Both bleaching protocols produced clinically relevant and statistically comparable color changes according to objective (ΔE00, ΔEab, and ΔWID) and subjective (ΔSGU) assessments (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The neutral-to-alkaline commercial in-office bleaching system resulted in a lower risk and lower intensity of tooth sensitivity than the acidic system, while no differences in bleaching effectiveness or gingival irritation were detected between the systems.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Among the two commercial bleaching systems evaluated, the neutral-to-alkaline formulation was associated with lower tooth sensitivity while providing clinically relevant whitening. Because the systems differed in characteristics beyond pH, this benefit cannot be attributed exclusively to pH.
METHODS: In this single-blind randomized clinical trial, 120 participants undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment were randomly allocated to receive either a 35% hydrogen peroxide bleaching gel with acidic pH (Whiteness HP Maxx) or a 35% hydrogen peroxide bleaching gel with neutral-to-alkaline pH (Whiteness HP AutoMixx Plus). Two bleaching sessions were performed at a 7-day interval. The primary outcome was the absolute risk and intensity of TS, assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included GI (VAS) and bleaching efficacy, evaluated by spectrophotometric measurements (ΔE00, ΔEab, and ΔWID) and shade guide units (ΔSGU). Data were analyzed using chi-square and independent-samples t-tests (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Participants treated with the neutral-to-alkaline formulation showed a significantly lower absolute risk of TS than those treated with the acidic formulation (55%vs. 75%; RR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.56-0.96; p = 0.02). TS intensity was also significantly lower in the neutral-to-alkaline group at multiple evaluation time points during both bleaching sessions (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between groups regarding the absolute risk or intensity of GI (p > 0.05). Both bleaching protocols produced clinically relevant and statistically comparable color changes according to objective (ΔE00, ΔEab, and ΔWID) and subjective (ΔSGU) assessments (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The neutral-to-alkaline commercial in-office bleaching system resulted in a lower risk and lower intensity of tooth sensitivity than the acidic system, while no differences in bleaching effectiveness or gingival irritation were detected between the systems.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Among the two commercial bleaching systems evaluated, the neutral-to-alkaline formulation was associated with lower tooth sensitivity while providing clinically relevant whitening. Because the systems differed in characteristics beyond pH, this benefit cannot be attributed exclusively to pH.