Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30767069›Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2019

Different light-activation systems associated with dental bleaching: a systematic review and a network meta-analysis.

Bianca Medeiros Maran, Patrícia K Ziegelmann, Adrieli Burey, Thalita de Paris Matos, Alessandro D Loguercio, Alessandra Reis

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Bianca Medeiros MaranDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of Western Paraná, Rua Engenharia, 464 - Universitário, Cascavel, Paraná, 85819-190, Brazil.
Patrícia K ZiegelmannStatistics Department and Post-Graduation Program in Epidemiology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Paulo Gama, 110 - Farroupilha, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, 90040-060, Brazil.
Adrieli BureyDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, BlocoM, Sala 64-A, Uvaranas, Ponta Grossa, Paraná, 84030-900, Brazil.
Thalita de Paris MatosDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, BlocoM, Sala 64-A, Uvaranas, Ponta Grossa, Paraná, 84030-900, Brazil.
Alessandro D LoguercioDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, Bloco M, Sala 64-A, Uvaranas, Ponta Grossa, Paraná, 84030-900, Brazil.
Alessandra ReisDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, Bloco M, Sala 64-A, Uvaranas, Ponta Grossa, Paraná, 84030-900, Brazil. reis_ale@hotmail.com.

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient?fico e Tecnol?gico 303332/2017-4Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient?fico e Tecnol?gico (BR) 305588/2014-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesA systematic review and a network meta-analysis were performed to answer the following research question: "Is there any light-activation protocol capable of improving color change efficacy when associated with an in-office bleaching gel in adults?" MATERIAL AND

methodsA search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, Cochrane Library, and SIGLE without date and/or language restrictions in April 23, 2017 (updated on March 30, 2018). IADR abstracts (1990-2018), unpublished and ongoing trial registries, dissertations, and theses were also searched. Only randomized clinical trials conducted in adults that included at least one group treated with in-office dental bleaching with light activation were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. A random-effects Bayesian-mixed treatment comparison (MTC) model was used to combine light-activated versus light-free in-office bleaching with direct light-free comparison trials. A meta-analysis with independent analysis (high- and low-concentrate hydrogen peroxide [HP]) was conducted for color change (∆E*, ∆SGU).

resultsAfter the removal of duplicates, title, and abstract screening, 28 studies remained. Nine were considered to be at a low RoB, five were at a high RoB, and the remaining were at an unclear RoB. The MTC analysis showed no significant difference in color change (ΔE* and ΔSGU) between light-activation protocols and light-free in-office bleaching, regardless of the HP concentration in the efficacy of the bleaching.

conclusionNo type of light-activated in-office bleaching was superior to light-free in-office bleaching for both high- and low-concentrate in-office bleaching gels (PROSPERO-CRD42017078743). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although many times dental professionals use "laser whitening" as a form of marketing, this study confirmed that no type of light-activation for in-office bleaching can improve the bleaching efficacy.

Indexed as

Dentin SensitivityTooth BleachingTooth Bleaching AgentsAdultBayes TheoremHumansHydrogen PeroxideMaleHydrogen PeroxideTooth Bleaching AgentsLight activationMixed-treatment comparisonNetwork meta-analysisTooth bleachingTooth discoloration

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.