At-home Bleaching with a Novel Carbamide Peroxide Polymeric Nanoparticle Gel: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS) as well the effectiveness of at-home bleaching using two carbamide peroxide bleaching gels, specifically a novel polymeric nanoparticle gel (experimental) and a commercial gel (Opalescence PF, Ultradent, South Jordan, Utah, USA), applied at two application times. METHODS: This multicenter, triple-blind, and split-mouth randomized controlled trial was conducted on 80 healthy adults with canine teeth that were shade A2 or darker. The participants all used the experimental and the control gels on one side of a tray, depending on the group to which they were allocated, for 30 or 60 minutes per day over four weeks. The absolute risk and intensity of TS were assessed daily using the five-point Numeric Rating Scale and the 0-10 Visual Analogue Scale. Color change was evaluated with shade guide units (ΔSGU) and a digital spectrophotometer (ΔEab, ΔE00, and ΔWid) at baseline and 30 days postbleaching. The risk and intensity of TS was evaluated by the McNemar and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, respectively. Color change (ΔSGU, ΔEab, ΔE00, and ΔWid) was evaluated by Mann-Whitney and paired t-tests (α=0.05). RESULTS: No differences in the risk and intensity of TS were observed based on the bleaching gels used and the times of application (p>0.05). Thirty days after bleaching, there was no significant difference in color change, in terms of the bleaching gels used or the application times (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The novel carbamide peroxide polymeric nanoparticles gel, when applied for 30 or 60 minutes, produced effective color change and a low rate of tooth sensitivity, as compared to the control group.

Preventive Use of a Resin-based Desensitizer Containing Glutaraldehyde on Tooth Sensitivity Caused by In-office Bleaching: A Randomized, Single-blind Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk and intensity of bleaching-induced tooth sensitivity (TS) after in-office bleaching following topical application of a resin-based glutaraldehyde desensitizer. METHODS: Thirty-three patients were randomly assigned to the experimental (Gluma Desensitizer Liquid, Heraeus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) and placebo groups. The placebo or Gluma Desensitizer Liquid was applied for one minute prior to application of an in-office bleaching gel. Bleaching was performed with 35% hydrogen peroxide gel (three applications × 15 minutes each) over two sessions, one week apart. The color of the anterior teeth was evaluated before and 21 days after treatment using the VITA Classical shade guide, Bleachedguide 3D, and Easyshade spectrophotometer. TS during and after the bleaching was recorded according to the visual analog (VAS) and numerical rating (NRS) scales. All data were submitted to statistical analysis (α=0.05). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in absolute risk or intensity of TS between the two groups (risk and VAS, p=0.93 and 0.31, respectively; NRS, p≥0.45). At the end of the bleaching protocol, tooth whitening was observed in both groups, as evident from color change in shade guide units (ΔSGU, 4.1-7.1; both guides) and overall color change (ΔE, 7.4-9.3 units); however, there were no significant differences in whitening between the two groups ( p>0.11). CONCLUSION: Gluma Desensitizer Liquid was not able to reduce the risk or intensity of TS. Bleaching efficacy was not affected by application of the desensitizer.

Status of Endodontic Treatment and the Correlations to the Quality of Root Canal Filling and Coronal Restoration.

INTRODUCTION: This cross-sectional study evaluated the prevalence and quality of root canal treatment in 1,977 digital radiological files. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were statistically analyzed using descriptive analysis, and the chi-square test was performed with a 5% significance level. RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 34.9 years. The endodontic treatment frequency was 6.14%, significantly higher in premolars. Adequate endodontic treatment was observed in 39.7% of analyzed cases. Molars were significantly more frequent with regard to inadequate filling quality. In 47.6% of cases, the filling's apical limit was classified as adequate, and there was a higher incidence of molars that were inadequate. Restorations were classified as adequate in 79.0% of cases, and molars were responsible for the highest frequency of inadequate restorations. The frequency of teeth with endodontic treatment that showed no periapical changes was 47.7%. There was no significant difference in the presence of periapical change according to gender. An increased presence of periapical change was observed with increasing age. The periapical lesions were observed in 45% of cases and related to inadequate filling quality. The apical limit was considered inadequate and related to periapical changes in 42% of cases. Periapical changes were present in 52% of cases, regardless of the quality of the filling and apical limit. Such changes were present in 42% of cases with adequate coronal restoration. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that apical periodontitis (AP) is associated with the quality of endodontic treatment. The coronal restoration affects significantly the success rate of endodontic treatment. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The quality of the root filling and coronal restoration is closely related to periapical health.