Influence of a desensitizing agent on efficacy of a paint-on bleaching agent.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the influence of a desensitizing agent (VivaSens) on efficacy of a paint-on bleaching agent (VivaStyle Paint On Plus).


METHODS
Bleaching was performed for 7 days with VivaStyle Paint On Plus. The varnish was applied twice a day for 10 minutes each. 80 subjects were included in the study and randomly distributed in two groups (n = 40) according to exposed cervical dentin and perceived hypersensitivities. Group A used VivaStyle without VivaSens while Group B used VivaStyle Paint On Plus after a single application of VivaSens. Tooth color was assessed on facial surfaces of first upper incisors with Vita shade guide at baseline and 10 days after bleaching therapy. Sensitivity, with intensity graded from 0 (no sensitivity) to 10 (high sensitivity), was assessed chair-side using a blow of air at baseline, at the end of therapy (7 days) and 10 days after bleaching therapy. Statistical evaluation was performed with non parametric ANOVA.


RESULTS
Thirteen subjects dropped out of the study; six due to gingival burning sensation (A: 3; B: 3) related to the bleaching regimen and seven due to lack of compliance. Directly after completion of bleaching therapy, tooth color had changed significantly compared to baseline in both treatment groups without difference among the groups. Color changes (Delta) according to Vita shade guide were as follows (mean +/- standard deviation): Group A: Delta 2.7 +/- 1.0, Group B: Delta 2.8 +/- 0.9. After bleaching (7 days) the intensity of tooth hypersensitivity (mean +/- standard deviation) was increased significantly compared to baseline in both groups (P < 0.05): Group A: 1.58 +/- 1.91 (baseline: 0.4 +/- 0.5); Group B: 1.3 +/- 1.8 (baseline: 0.5 +/- 0.7). The number of subjects reporting tooth hypersensitivity increased in Group A by 5 (n = 13) and in Group B by 1 (n = 10) subject. Although degree of hypersensitivities and number of subjects with hypersensitivities were lower in Group B, there was no significant difference between the groups.
Ziebolz
Dirk
D
Department of Operative Dentistry, Preventive Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Goettingen, Germany. dirk.ziebolz@zm-goettingen.de
Hannig
Christian
C
Attin
Thomas
T
D000287:Administration, Topical; D000328:Adult; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D003807:Dentin Sensitivity / Q000145:classification / Q000517:prevention & control*; D004334:Drug Administration Schedule; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005891:Gingivitis / Q000139:chemically induced; D006801:Humans; D006861:Hydrogen Peroxide / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D007180:Incisor / Q000473:pathology; D008297:Male; D016877:Oxidants / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D020011:Protective Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D013997:Time Factors; D014073:Tooth Bleaching / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D019237:Tooth Cervix / Q000473:pathology; D014075:Tooth Discoloration / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000473:pathology
D003188:Composite Resins; D016877:Oxidants; D020011:Protective Agents; C525245:VivaSens Liner; C500417:Vivastyle; D006861:Hydrogen Peroxide