MedPath

Clinical Evaluation of Different Minimal Invasive Treatment Modalities of Mild to Moderate Dental Fluorosis Using A Visual Analog Scale

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Dental Fluorosis
Interventions
Other: Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%
Other: MI-Paste Plus®
Other: Opalustre™
Registration Number
NCT05051748
Lead Sponsor
Suez Canal University
Brief Summary

This study was conducted for clinical evaluation of the quality of different minimal-invasive treatment modalities and combination treatments in esthetics improvement of mild to moderate fluorosed teeth using two different evaluation methods.

One hundred and sixty fluorosed teeth were included in this study. Prior to the interventions, pre-operative photographs were taken as baseline records. After that teeth were randomly allocated in eight treatment protocols with twenty teeth (n=20) included in each protocol. Protocol one (P1) Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%. Protocol two (P2) Opalustre™. Protocol three (P3) MI-Paste Plus®. In protocol four (P4) teeth were treated with Opalustre™ followed by Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%. In protocol five (P5) Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40% was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®, while in protocol six (P6) Opalustre™ was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®. Whereas protocol seven (P7) teeth were treated with Opalustre™ followed by Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40% and lastly MI-Paste Plus®. Protocol eight (P8) control.

All teeth were evaluated immediately after treatment (T1), after 14 days (T2), after 3 months (T3) and after 6 months (T4).

They were rated for "improvement in appearance" and "change in white/brown opaque areas" using VAS through two blinded evaluators by comparing photographs of each follow-up time point with baseline. "Patient satisfaction", "tooth sensitivity" and "requirements for further treatments" were recorded by the participant.

Detailed Description

This study was conducted for clinical evaluation of the quality of different minimal-invasive treatment modalities and combination treatments in esthetics improvement of mild to moderate fluorosed teeth using two different evaluation methods.

Materials used in this study were Opalustre™ (microabrasion paste of 6.6% hydrochloric acid and Silicon Carbide), Opalescence™ Boost™ PF 40% (in-office bleaching of 40% hydrogen peroxide) and MI-Paste Plus® (topical remineralizing tooth crème of casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium fluoride phosphate).

One hundred and sixty fluorosed teeth were included in this study. Prior to the interventions, pre-operative photographs were taken as baseline records. After that teeth were randomly allocated in eight treatment protocols with twenty teeth (n=20) included in each protocol. Protocol one (P1) Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%. Protocol two (P2) Opalustre™. Protocol three (P3) MI-Paste Plus®. In protocol four (P4) teeth were treated with Opalustre™ followed by Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%. In protocol five (P5) Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40% was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®, while in protocol six (P6) Opalustre™ was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®. Whereas protocol seven (P7) teeth were treated with Opalustre™ followed by Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40% and lastly MI-Paste Plus®. Protocol eight (P8) control.

All teeth were evaluated immediately after treatment (T1), after 14 days (T2), after 3 months (T3) and after 6 months (T4).

They were rated for "improvement in appearance" and "change in white/brown opaque areas" using VAS through two blinded evaluators by comparing photographs of each follow-up time point with baseline. "Patient satisfaction", "tooth sensitivity" and "requirements for further treatments" were recorded by the participant.

Data were collected, checked, revised and organized in tables and figures using Microsoft Excel 2016.Improvement in appearance, change in opacity, tooth sensitivity, patient satisfaction and requirement for further treatment were not normally distributed (p\<0.05\*) i.e. nonparametric data, accordingly, Freidman's test to differentiate between timepoints and Kruskal-Wallis to compare between treatment protocols were applied at 0.05 level.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
16
Inclusion Criteria
  • Each participant had at least 8 teeth with mild to moderate dental fluorosis score 1-4 according to Thylstrup and Fejerskov index.
  • Participants of age range 20-35 years old
  • Good oral and general health
  • Had no caries or restorations on the teeth to be treated
  • Ability to return for periodic recalls
Exclusion Criteria
  • Hypersensitive teeth
  • Any fixed orthodontic appliance
  • Current or previous use of bleaching agents
  • A history of allergies to tooth whitening product
  • Smoking habits
  • Pregnant or lactating women
  • Non-vital or teeth with symptoms of pulpitis
  • Loss or fracture of maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Microabrasion + In-office bleachingOpalescence™ boost™ PF 40%teeth were treated with enamel microabrasion followed by in-office bleaching.
In-office bleaching + RemineralizationOpalescence™ boost™ PF 40%n-office bleaching was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®
In-office bleachingOpalescence™ boost™ PF 40%40% hydrogen peroxide in-office bleaching (Opalescence™ boost™ PF 40%, Ultradent Products, Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA)
Microabrasion + RemineralizationMI-Paste Plus®microabrasion was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®
RemineralizationMI-Paste Plus®casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium fluoride phosphate (CPP-ACFP) remineralizing tooth crème (MI-Paste Plus®, GC America Inc., USA).
Microabrasion + In-office bleaching + RemineralizationOpalescence™ boost™ PF 40%teeth were treated with microabrasion followed by in-office bleaching and lastly MI-Paste Plus®
Microabrasion + In-office bleaching + RemineralizationOpalustre™teeth were treated with microabrasion followed by in-office bleaching and lastly MI-Paste Plus®
microabrasionOpalustre™6.6% hydrochloric acid and silicon carbide microparticles microabrasion paste (Opalustre™, Ultradent Products, Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA).
Microabrasion + In-office bleachingOpalustre™teeth were treated with enamel microabrasion followed by in-office bleaching.
In-office bleaching + RemineralizationMI-Paste Plus®n-office bleaching was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®
Microabrasion + RemineralizationOpalustre™microabrasion was applied followed by MI-Paste Plus®
Microabrasion + In-office bleaching + RemineralizationMI-Paste Plus®teeth were treated with microabrasion followed by in-office bleaching and lastly MI-Paste Plus®
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Patient SatisfactionSix Months

Participants were asked to score for "patient satisfaction" using VAS ranging from 1 to 7

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Faculty of dentistry, Suez canal university

🇪🇬

Ismailia, Egypt

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath