American Journal of Dentistry
Volume 24, Issue 5, October 2011, Pages 259-263
Purpose: To compare the enamel whitening effect of a 20-minute dielectrophoresis enhanced electrochemical delivery to a 20-minute diffusion treatment.
Methods: Forty freshly extracted human teeth without detectable caries or restoration were stored in distilled water at 4 degrees C and used within 1 month of extraction. Two different bleaching gels (Plus White 5 Minute Speed Whitening Gel and 35% Opalescence PF gel) were tested. The study had two parts:
Part 1: Quantitative comparison of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2, HP) absorption--following application of an over-the-counter 35% HP whitening gel (Plus White 5 Minute Speed Whitening Gel) to 30 (n = 30) extracted human teeth by conventional diffusion or dielectrophoresis. The amount of H2O2 that diffused from the dentin was measured by a colorimetric oxidation-reduction reaction kit. HP concentration was measured by UV-Vis spectroscopy at 550 nm.
Part 2: HP diffusion in stained teeth--35% carbamide peroxide whitening gel (35% Opalescence PF gel) was applied to 10 extracted human teeth (n = 10) stained by immersion in a black tea solution for 48 hours. The teeth were randomly assigned to the 20-minute dielectrophoresis or diffusion treatment group; whitening was evaluated by a dental spectrophotometer and macro-photography.
Results: Part 1: The analysis found significant differences between both groups with relative percent errors of 3% or less (a single outlier had an RPE of 12%). The average absorbance for the dielectrophoresis group in round 1 was 79% greater than the diffusion group. The average absorbance for the dielectrophoresis group in round 2 was 130% greater than the diffusion group. A single-factor ANOVA found a statistically significant difference between the diffusion and dielectrophoresis groups (P = 0.01). Full Abstract
Part 2: The average change in Shade Guide Units (SGU) was 0.6 for the diffusion group, well under the error of measurement of 0.82 SGU. The average change in SGU for the dielectrophoresis group was 9, significantly above the error of measurement and 14 times or 1,400% greater than the diffusion group average. A single-factor ANOVA found a statistically significant difference between the diffusion and dielectrophoresis treatment groups (P < 0.001).