SUMMARYObjective: The current study assessed the efficacy of three current bleaching methods.Methods: Seventy-five healthy subjects (45♀; 30♂) with anterior teeth, having a Vita Shade score of A2 or darker, participated in the study. The subjects were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: Group A: home-bleaching (Illumine Home, 10% carbamide peroxide, trays, overnight, for two weeks), Group B: inoffice bleaching (Illumine Office, 15% hydrogen peroxide, trays for 45 minutes, three times over three weeks), Group C: Whitestrips (strips, twice a day, 30 minutes each for two weeks).Following the screening visit, three weeks prior to the baseline examination, all subjects received a dental prophylaxis. Clinical RelevanceThe efficacy of vital bleaching depends on the two aspects-viz, bleaching agent and the bleaching method. Results from this in vivo study show that 10% carbamide peroxide home-bleaching and 15% hydrogen peroxide in-office bleaching were more effective than a 6% hydrogen peroxide home-bleaching over-the-counter product up to three months after completion of the bleaching treatment. M Bizhang • Y-HP Chun • K Damerau P Singh • WH-M Raab • S ZimmerThe color of the teeth was determined using a colorimeter (ShadeEye NCC) and a custom-made stent at baseline (E 0 ), immediately after completion of the bleaching (E 3 ) and three months after treatment (E 4 ). All subjects received oral hygiene instructions and a toothbrush and toothpaste for oral home care during the study period.The change of tooth color was determined for each treatment regimen between baseline and E 3 and baseline and E 4 and was statistically analyzed performing the Kruskal Wallis test and the Mann-Whitney-U test. The significance level was set at p<0.01.Results: The dropout rate was 0%. Mean (SD) ∆E* (overall color change) from baseline to immediately after treatment was 6.57 (2.13) for Group A, 5.77(1.72) for Group B and 3.58 (1.57) for Group C. The mean (SD) tooth color change from baseline to three months after treatment ∆E* was: 4.98(1.34) for Group A, 4.59 (1.42) for Group B and 2.99 (1.39) for Group C. Significant differences were found between home bleaching and Whitestrips, as well as between in-office bleaching and Whitestrips, but not between homebleaching and in-office bleaching during the same time.Conclusion: Using an objective color measurement device, home bleaching and in-office bleaching were found to be superior to Whitestrips. Home bleaching and in-office bleaching were equally efficient for bleaching teeth and maintaining the results for up to three months.

Material & MethodsWe have analyzed the loss of enamel and dentine after exposure to different non-alcoholic drinks with a simple new method using bovine teeth. 100 enamel and 100 dentine specimens from freshly extracted bovine incisors were randomly attributed to 10 groups (n=10 for enamel and dentine each). Prior to the start of the experiment all specimens were weighed using a precision balance. The mean initial masses (SD) were 35.8 mg (7.2) for enamel and 24.7 mg (7.0) for dentine. No statistically significant differences were found between groups for initial masses (p>0.05, ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test). Thereafter, all specimens of one group were simultaneously placed in 200 ml of the following fluids: Coca-Cola, Coca-Cola light, Sprite, apple juice, Red Bull, orange juice, Bonaqua Fruits (Mango-Acai), tap water, chlorinated swimming pool water, and lemon juice. Fluids were continuously ventilated at 37° C for 7 days. Thereafter the specimens were weighed again and the mean mass loss was calculated.ResultsThe values were (enamel/dentine): Coca-Cola 7.5 mg/6.6 mg; Coca-Cola light 5.2 mg/3.5 mg, Sprite 26.1 mg/17.7 mg, apple juice 27.1 mg/15.2 mg, Red Bull 16.6 mg/17.0 mg, orange juice 24.3 mg/20.2 mg, Bonaqua Fruits (Mango-Acai) 17.8 mg/16.2 mg, tap water -0.2 mg/-0.3 mg, swimming pool water -0.3 mg/-0.2 mg, and lemon juice 32.0 mg/28.3 mg. From all drinks, Cola and Cola light showed the least erosivity (p<0.001, ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test) whereas lemon juice showed statistically significant higher erosivity than all other drinks except Sprite and apple juice (p<0.01, ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test).ConclusionsIn conclusion, erosivity of common non-alcoholic drinks varies widely. For example, Sprite, apple juice, and orange juice are about five times more erosive than Coca-Cola light. The findings from the present study should be taken into account in choosing a diet that provides satisfactory nutrition while minimizing tooth erosion.

No abstract

Our data reveal that breath malodour is mainly of oral origin and that patients with pseudo-halitosis are frequently not diagnosed correctly by doctors, resulting in a considerable amount of over-treatment.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the susceptibility of dentin to brushing abrasion using four different toothbrushes (rotating-oscillating, sonic and two types of manual toothbrushes) with the same brushing forces.MethodsDentin samples (n = 72) were selected from 72 impacted third molars. Half of the surface of dentin samples was covered with an adhesive tape, creating a protected and a freely exposed area in the same specimen. Brushing was performed with either a: sonic (Sonicare PowerUp, Philips GmbH, Hamburg, Germany), b: oscillating-rotating (Oral B Vitality Precisions Clean, Procter & Gamble, Schwalbach am Taunus, Germany) or two different manual toothbrushes c: flat trim brush head toothbrush (Dr. Best: Original, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Bühl, Germany) and d: rippled-shaped brush head toothbrush (Blend-a-Dent, Complete V-Interdental, Blend-a-med, Schwalbach, Germany) in a custom made automatic brushing machine. The brushing force was set to 2 N and a whitening toothpaste (RDA = 150) was used. The simulation period was performed over a calculated period to mimic a brushing behavior of two times a day brushing for eight years and six months. Dentin loss was quantitatively determined by profilometry and statistically analyzed by Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney-U Test (p < 0.05).ResultsThe mean (standard deviation) surface loss was 21.03 (±1.26) μm for the sonic toothbrush, 15.71 (±0.85) μm for the oscillating-rotating toothbrush, 6.13 (±1.24) μm for the manual toothbrush with flat trim brush head and 2.50 (±0.43) μm for the manual toothbrush with rippled-shaped brush head. Differences between all groups were statistically significant at p<0.05.ConclusionUsing the same brushing force and a highly abrasive toothpaste, manual toothbrushes are significantly less abrasive compared to power toothbrushes for an 8.5—year simulation.