ArticleBritish dental journal2020
The association of external cervical resorption with modern internal bleaching protocols: what is the current evidence?
Article in British dental journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endodontic and Surgical Management of External Cervical Root Resorption: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Various Light-Cure Biomaterials as an Intraorifice Barrier: An In Vitro Study.Cureus · 2025Article
- One-year clinical observation of the effect of internal bleaching on pulpless discolored teeth.Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2023Article
- Present status and future directions - Managing discoloured teeth.International endodontic journal · 2022Review
- Evaluation of the penetration of intracoronal bleaching agents into the cervical region using different intraorifice barriers.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Tooth root resorption: A review.Science progressReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Internal bleaching is an effective and minimally invasive way of bleaching non-vital teeth. A commonly cited risk associated with it is external cervical resorption (ECR), which is a potentially significant complication that could result in loss of the tooth. This is an important point of discussion with a patient during the consent process. Legally, patients are required to be made aware of material risks to which they would be likely to attach significance, such as the loss of a tooth. The risk of ECR is therefore a key component in the patient's decision-making process as they weigh it against the perceived benefits. Over the last ten years, both clinical and legal reasons have resulted in a number of changes in the materials and protocols used for internal bleaching. This leads to the question of what the current quality of evidence is regarding the association of ECR following internal bleaching with modern protocols. Other restorative options for discoloured teeth, such as veneers or crowns, involve the irreversible removal of tooth tissue and these may be chosen by patients over internal bleaching based on out-of-date evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.