Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32428059›Full record

Trial reportJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2020

Effect of violet LED light on in-office bleaching protocols: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Matheus Kury, Erica Eiko Wada, Daylana Pacheco da Silva, Cínthia Pereira Machado Tabchoury, Marcelo Giannini, Vanessa Cavalli

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Hyaluronic Acid-Based Bleaching Gels With NF_TiOJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matheus KuryDepartamento de Odontologia Restauradora, Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brasil.
Erica Eiko WadaDepartamento de Odontologia Restauradora, Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brasil.
Daylana Pacheco da SilvaDepartamento de Odontologia Restauradora, Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brasil.
Cínthia Pereira Machado TabchouryDepartamento de Ciências Fisiológicas, Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brasil.
Marcelo GianniniDepartamento de Odontologia Restauradora, Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brasil.
Vanessa CavalliDepartamento de Odontologia Restauradora, Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brasil.
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective This study evaluated the clinical effect of violet LED light on in-office bleaching used alone or combined with 37% carbamide peroxide (CP) or 35% hydrogen peroxide (HP). Methodology A total of 100 patients were divided into five groups (n=20): LED, LED/CP, CP, LED/HP and HP. Colorimetric evaluation was performed using a spectrophotometer (ΔE, ΔL, Δa, Δb) and a visual shade guide (ΔSGU). Calcium (Ca)/phosphorous (P) ratio was quantified in the enamel microbiopsies. Measurements were performed at baseline (T 0 ), after bleaching (T B ) and in the 14-day follow-up (T 14 ). At each bleaching session, a visual scale determined the absolute risk (AR) and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS). Data were evaluated by one-way (ΔE, Δa, ΔL, Δb), two-way repeated measures ANOVA (Ca/P ratio), and Tukey post-hoc tests. ΔSGU and TS were evaluated by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney, and AR by Chi-Squared tests (a=5%). Results LED produced the lowest ΔE (p<0.05), but LED/HP promoted greater ΔE, ΔSGU and Δb (T 14 ) than HP (p<0.05). No differences were observed in ΔE and ΔSGU for LED/CP and HP groups (p>0.05). ΔL and Δa were not influenced by LED activation. After bleaching, LED/CP exhibited greater Δb than CP (p>0.05), but no differences were found between these groups at T 14 (p>0.05). LED treatment promoted the lowest risk of TS (16%), while HP promoted the highest (94.4%) (p<0.05). No statistical differences of risk of TS were found for CP (44%), LED/CP (61%) and LED/HP (88%) groups (p>0.05). No differences were found in enamel Ca/P ratio among treatments, regardless of evaluation times. Conclusions Violet LED alone produced the lowest bleaching effect, but enhanced HP bleaching results. Patients treated with LED/CP reached the same efficacy of HP, with reduced risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity and none of the bleaching protocols adversely affected enamel mineral content.

Indexed as

LightAdolescentAdultAnalysis of VarianceCarbamide PeroxideColorimetryCombined Modality TherapyDental EnamelDentin SensitivityFemaleHumansHydrogen PeroxideMalePhototherapyReference ValuesRisk FactorsCarbamide PeroxideHydrogen PeroxideTooth Bleaching Agents

Identifiers

PMID32428059
PMCPMC7213781
OpenAlexW3028240831

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.