Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

cosmetic dentistry_beauty & science No. 1, 2017

| industry report effectiveness of the professional home whitening Table 2: Results from the clinical diary of the patients: the column on the left shows the patients, while the other columns show the hours and days passed from the application of the bleaching product. Each patient had to report the level of post-operative sensitivity at each period: value 1 indicates a very low level, value 2: low, 3: moderate, 4: heavy, 5: very heavy (implicating problems with the assumption of cold liquids or the contact with air and pain during chewing). Patient 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 h 4 5 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 h 4 5 4 3 3 3 3 4 6 h 2 4 4 2 3 2 2 3 12 h 24 h 2 d 2 4 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 3 d 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 d 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 d 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 d 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 containing double conjugated links, aromatic sys- tems and quinolonic systems.1, 3 Many bleaching products for outpatient or home bleaching that are currently on the market are based on hydrogen peroxide and carbamide peroxide at different concentrations.1, 4 For outpatient bleaching, the professional applies the mixture on the teeth to be treated, while for at home bleaching, a special resin tray is made to be worn by the patient with the product inside during the night. The new bleaching product ENA White 2.0 (Micerium S.p.A., Italy; Fig. 2) is an innovation in this field as the bleaching product is not applied with a tray or in of- fice but supplied by a toothbrush with a dispenser. The aim of this study is to verify the efficacy of the bleaching treatment ENA White 2.0 through spec- trophotometer analysis, on a group of 10 patients 6 months after the clinical results, excluding pos- sible side effects such as sensitivity. Materials and methods Eight patients who required the cosmetic treatment of outpatient bleaching were selected. The criteria to be included in the group of the study were: to be non-smokers, aged between 18 and 50 years old, not periodontally compromised and without any pros- thetic element or aesthetic restoration on anterior teeth. Some pregnant women were excluded, as it is advisable to postpone treatment until after the birth as it is a cosmetic treatment, despite no side effects being documented for the foetus nor the mother. Before starting the clinical bleaching session, all patients were submitted to an accurate treatment of oral hygiene and spectrophotometer analysis of the six frontal superior elements (from canine to canine). For each dental element (from 1.3 to 2.3), the vari- ables L (value), C (chroma) and h (hue) in the cervical, medium and incisal sections were observed (Fig. 1 and Table 1). The three above-described parameters were ob- served before the treatment and after 6 months, with the aim of evaluating the maintenance of the colour. All patients used the toothbrush twice a day: once in the morning and once in the evening. The patients were given instructions on how to use the device as follows: Fig. 1: SpectroShade picture of element 11 shows the difference of the chromatic measurements while varying the extension of the reference area can be noticed. The window on the top left of the picture shows how the program can provide the extent of value (L), chroma (C) and hue (h) for each portion of the tooth and compare it with the colour on the market (left and right column respectively). In the analysed clinical case, element 11 is similar to colour A2 for chroma, hue and value. On the right, the discrepancy between A2 and the examined tooth is reported on a scale: the extent of chroma is higher than A2 while the hue is lower. Starting from A2, this indicates a total colour that is more saturated and tending to red. Fig. 1 52 cosmetic dentistry 1 2017

Pages Overview