Randomized clinical trials of dental bleaching - Compliance with the CONSORT Statement: a systematic review

Outcome measurements and quality of randomized controlled clinical trials of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review and qualitative analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The lack of consensus regarding a standardized set of outcome measurements and noncompliance with current reporting guidelines in clinical trials of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) hamper interstudy comparability, compromise scientific evidence, and waste research effort and resources in prosthetic dentistry.

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this systematic review was to identify all primary and secondary outcome measurements assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of tooth-supported FDPs. Secondary objectives were to assess their methodological quality by using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool (RoB, v2.0) and their reporting quality by means of a standardized 16-item CONSORT assessment tool through published reports.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library to identify all RCT-related articles published in the past 10 years. Differences in RoB were tested with the Pearson chi-squared test, and those in CONSORT score with the Student t test.

RESULTS

A total of 64 RCTs from 79 publications were deemed eligible. The diversity of outcome measures used in the field is apparent. Twenty percent of the included studies had a low RoB, 79% showed some concerns, and 1% had a high RoB. The mean ±standard deviation CONSORT compliance score was 22.56 ±3.17. Trials adhered to the CONSORT statement reported lower RoB than those that did not adhere (P<.001). RCTs with a low RoB reported more comprehensive adherence to CONSORT guidelines than those with some concerns (MD 4 [95% CI 1.52-6.48]; P=.004).

CONCLUSIONS

A standardized core outcome reporting set in clinical research on tooth-supported FDPs remains evident. Adherence to the CONSORT statement continues to be low, with some RoB concerns that can be improved.

Effectiveness of endodontic tissue engineering in treatment of apical periodontitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Regenerative endodontics has evolved in recent years with tissue engineering concepts in particular appearing promising. Endodontic tissue engineering (ETE) describes the various approaches based on the orthograde introduction of scaffolds or biomaterials (with or without cells) into the root canal to achieve pulp tissue regeneration. There are currently no systematic reviews investigating whether ETE is a suitable method for the treatment of endodontic disease in both mature and immature permanent teeth.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of ETE in permanent teeth with pulp necrosis in comparison with conventional endodontic treatment.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library for published reports as well as Google Scholar for grey literature up to November 2021. Included were studies of patients with permanent immature or mature teeth and pulp necrosis with or without signs of apical periodontitis (P) comparing ETE (I) with calcium hydroxide apexification, apical plug and root canal treatment (C) in terms of tooth survival, pain, tenderness, swelling, need for medication (analgesics and antibiotics), radiographic evidence of reduction in apical lesion size, radiographic evidence of normal periodontal ligament space, function (fracture and restoration longevity), the need for further intervention, adverse effects (including exacerbation, restoration integrity, allergy and discolouration), oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), presence of sinus tract and response to sensibility testing (O). An observation period of at least 12 months was mandatory (T) and the number of patients in human experimental studies or longitudinal observational studies had to be at least 20 (10 in each arm) at the end (S). Risk of bias was appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool. Two authors independently screened the records, assessed full texts for eligibility and evaluated risk of bias. Heterogeneity of outcomes and limited body of evidence did not allow for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Two randomized clinical trials investigating cell transplantation approaches with a total of 76 participants (40 treated immature teeth and 36 treated mature teeth) were included for qualitative analysis. Both studies had moderate concerns in terms of risk of bias. Due to the lack of homogeneity a meta-analysis was not possible. Tooth survival for ETE, root canal treatment and apexification was 100% after 12 months. Teeth treated with ETE showed a higher number of cases with positive pulpal responses to sensitivity tests and with blood perfusion compared with root canal treatment or apexification.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review highlights that there is limited evidence for ETE approaches. Even though the results of this review suggest a high survival with ETE in mature and immature teeth, there is a moderate risk of bias due to methodological limitations in the included studies, so the overall results should be interpreted with caution. Lack of a robust control group was a common problem during literature screening, and outcomes besides dental survival were reported inconsistently. Future clinical trials need to address methodical as well as assessment concerns and report long-term results.

CONCLUSION

The benefits and high survival rates reported for ETE techniques suggest that this procedure might be an alternative to conventional procedures for permanent teeth with pulpal necrosis. However, more appropriate studies are needed to derive clinical recommendations.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021266350).

A comprehensive quality analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials of Asian ginseng and American ginseng based on the CONSORT guideline

Ginseng is an international herb that has been used for thousands of years. Two species most commonly applied and investigated in the ginseng family are Asian ginseng and American ginseng. The number of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) has conspicuously increased, driven by the rapid development of ginseng. However, the reporting of RCT items of ginseng is deficient because of different trial designs and reporting formats, which is a challenge for researchers who are looking for the data with high quality and reliability. Thus, this study focused on providing an extensive analysis of these two species and examined the quality of the RCTs, based on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guideline. Ninety-one RCTs conducted from 1980 to 2019 that were related to Asian ginseng and American ginseng used singly met our inclusion criteria. We found that the reporting quality of the two species has improved during the past 40 years. Publication date and sample size were significantly associated with the reporting quality. Rigorous RCTs designed for the species of ginseng are warranted, which can shed light on product research and development of ginseng in the future.

Compliance of randomized controlled trials in posterior restorations with the CONSORT statement: a systematic review of methodology

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate the compliance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in posterior restorations with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement (CONSORT) statement and to analyze the risk of bias (RoB) of these studies.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS/BBO, and Cochrane Library. Only RCTs published in peer-reviewed journals were included. The compliance with the CONSORT was evaluated in a 0-2 scale where 0 = no description, 1 = poor description and 2 = adequate description. Descriptive analyses of the CONSORT mean score by journal, country, and RoB were performed. The RoB in RCTs was evaluated by using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool version 1.0.

RESULTS

A total of 15,476 studies were identified after duplicates removal. O only 202 meet the eligibility criteria, among which 31 were follow-up studies. Concerning the overall RoB, only 29 out of 171 were classified as low risk of bias. The overall mean CONSORT score was 19 ± 5.4 points, which means compliance of approximately 59%. Significant differences among countries, publication period, and RoB were observed (p < 0.001). The journal's impact factor was not correlated with the overall CONSORT score (p = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

The adherence of RCTs conducted in posterior restorations to the CONSORT Statement is still low. In addition, most studies were classified as at unclear risk of bias. These results call up an urgent need for improvement.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Most RCTs conducted in posterior teeth have poor reporting and are mainly classified as having an unclear risk of bias.

CONSORT Compliance in Randomized Clinical Trials of Regenerative Endodontic treatments of Necrotic Immature Teeth. A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate methodological quality of clinical trials in regenerative endodontics and its compliance with the CONSORT statement.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in eight electronic databases. Only clinical trials whose participants underwent regenerative endodontic treatment on necrotic permanent immature teeth were included. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool (RoB, version 2.0). Compliance of articles with the CONSORT guidelines was assessed by a tool with scales: 0 = no description, 1 = deficient, and 2 = adequate description, totaling a maximum score of 32 points. The Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare the scores between journals, studies, country, income levels, and publication periods. Spearman correlation analyses were performed between CONSORT compliance scores and 2019 journal CiteScore values, publication year, and quality assessment.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included. The average CONSORT compliance score was 20.95 (±6.19). The better reported items were the description of the interventions performed in the trials (100%), followed by the description of the number of patients analyzed, losses and exclusions (90%) and the hypothesis tested (85%). Within the 20 studies, 3 articles were classified as "low risk of bias," 8 studies were classified as "some concerns" and 9 studies were considered "high risk of bias". Studies carried out in countries with higher income levels presented higher CONSORT scores. Significant moderate correlations were found between the CONSORT score and the percentage of risk of bias in low-risk domains (r_s = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.31 to 0.94, p = 0.003) and the overall risk of bias categories (r_s = 0.76, 95%CI = 0.54 to 0.98, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The adequacy of reporting based on the CONSORT checklist items of regenerative endodontic trials was low with a moderate to high risk of bias.

A multiyear systematic survey of the quality of reporting for randomised trials in dentistry, neurology and geriatrics published in journals of Spain and Latin America

BACKGROUND

The Iberoamerican Cochrane Network is currently developing an extensive project to identify Spanish-language journals that publish original clinical research in Spain and Latin America. The project is called BADERI (Database of Iberoamerican Essays and Journal) and feeds the research articles, mainly randomised clinical trials (RCTs), into CENTRAL (Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Trials). This study aims to assess the quality of reporting of RCTs published in Spanish and Latin American journals for three clinical fields and assess changes over time.

METHODS

We did a systematic survey with time trend analysis of RCTs for dentistry, geriatrics, and neurology. These fields were chosen for pragmatic reasons as they had not yet been completed in BADERI. After screening RCTs from 1990 to 2018 for randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials, we extracted data for 23 CONSORT items. The primary outcome was the total score of the 23 predefined CONSORT 2010 items for each RCT (score range from 0 to 34). The secondary outcome measure was the score for each one of these 23 items.

RESULTS

A total of 392 articles from 1990 to 2018 were included as follows: dentistry (282), neurology (80), and geriatrics (30). We found that the overall compliance score for the CONSORT items included in this study for all 392 RCTs analysed was 12.6 on a scale with a maximum score of 34. With time, the quality of reporting improved slightly for all RCTs. None of the articles achieved the complete individual CONSORT item compliance score. The lowest overall compliance percentage was for item 10 (Randomisation implementation) and item 24 (Protocol registration), with a dismal 1% compliance across all included RCTs, regardless of country.

CONCLUSIONS

CONSORT compliance is very poor in the 392 analysed RCTs. The impact of the CONSORT statement on improving the completeness of RCT reporting in Latin America and Spain is not clear. Iberoamerican journals should become more involved in endorsing and enforcing adherence to the CONSORT guidelines.

Quality Evaluation of Randomized Controlled Trials of Rhodiola Species: A Systematic Review

Background

Rhodiola is a worldwide used medicinal plant for its various medicinal functions, and the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Rhodiola is increasing in recent years. This study aims to evaluate the reporting quality and risk of bias of the current RCT reports of different Rhodiola species.

Methods

Six databases including Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrial.gov, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched to identify RCTs that used Rhodiola as a single intervention and were published in English or Chinese from inception to December 2020. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement was used as the checklist for assessment, and a scoring system was applied to the evaluation of RCTs. Score 0 represents no reporting or inadequate reporting, and score 1 represents adequate reporting. The risk of bias of the included studies was also assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

Results

A total of 39 RCTs were included in this study, including 23 RCTs of Rhodiola rosea (R. rosea), 8 RCTs of Rhodiola crenulata (R. crenulata), and 8 RCTs of Rhodiola wallichiana (R. wallichiana). None of the included studies met all the CONSORT statement criteria, and the reporting quality of RCTs of the three Rhodiola species was all generally poor. Based on the risk of bias assessment, the majority of included studies were judged to have an unclear risk of bias in most domains due to inadequate reporting.

Conclusions

There is inadequate reporting among the included RCTs of different Rhodiola species, and RCTs of Rhodiola with higher reporting quality and better methodological quality are needed.

Reporting of statistical sample size calculations in publications of trials on age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma and cataract

Background

Transparent and complete publications of randomised controlled trials (RCT) ought to comply with the guidelines of the CONSORT Statement, which stipulates sample size calculation as an important aspect of trial planning. The objective of this study was to analyse and compare the reporting of statistical sample size calculations in RCT papers on the treatment of age-related macular degeneration (AMD), glaucoma and cataract published in 2018.

Material and methods

This study comprises a total of 113 RCT papers (RCT-P) published in 2018 (AMD: 14, glaucoma: 28, cataract: 71), in English or German, and identified through an internet-based literature search in PubMed and EMBASE. The primary outcome measure of the study was the number of trials providing a complete description of the underlying sample case calculation on the basis of the variables required (significance level, expected outcomes, power, and resulting sample size).

Results

Of the RCTs reviewed, 64% (AMD), 61% (glaucoma) and 31% (cataract) provided a justification of the number of patients included. A complete description of the described studies’ sample size calculation including all the necessary values (primary outcome measure of this study) was described by 21% of the AMD, 29% of the cataract and 18% of the glaucoma RCT publications (in total: 24 of 113 (21%) at a confidence interval of 95%: [13%; 29%]).

Conclusion

All three treatment areas analysed lacked reporting quality regarding the justification of the number of patients included in a clinical trial based on a sample size calculation required for ethical reasons. More than half of all RCT publications reviewed did not provide all of the required information on statistical sample size calculation, and thus lacked transparency and completeness. It is therefore urgently required to involve methodologists in a study’s planning and publishing processes to ensure that methodology descriptions are transparent and of high quality.

Topical application of a desensitizing agent containing potassium nitrate before dental bleaching: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS) after topical application of desensitizers containing potassium nitrate before dental bleaching.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, Cochrane Library, and SIGLE. We also surveyed gray literature without restrictions. We meta-analyzed the data using the random-effects model to compare potassium nitrate and placebo in terms of risk and intensity of TS and color change (∆SGU or ∆E). The quality of the evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. The risk of bias (RoB) of the included studies was analyzed using the Cochrane RoB tool.

RESULTS

After the database screening, 24 articles remained. A significant 12% lower risk for the groups where desensitizing agents were applied (p = 0.02), with a risk ratio of 0.88 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.98). About the intensity of TS, a significant average mean difference of - 0.77 units of VAS units (95%CI - 1.34 to - 0.19; p = 0.01) in favor of the desensitizer group. In the NRS scale, a significant average mean difference of - 0.36 (95% CI - 0.61 to - 0.12; p value = 0.004) in favor of the desensitizer group. No significant difference was observed in color change (p > 0.28) in ∆SGU and ∆E.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a significant reduction in the risk and intensity of TS was observed in groups treated with a potassium nitrate at some point during the bleaching, the clinical significance of this reduction is subtle and clinically questionable. Color change is not affected by the use of agents.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The reduction in the risk and intensity of TS with the topical application of potassium nitrate-based desensitizing agents in dental bleaching is subtle and maybe clinically questionable.

COMPLIANCE OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS ON DENTAL CARIES PREVENTION METHODS WITH THE CONSORT STATEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

OBJECTIVE

Reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry remains suboptimal. Considering the positive impact of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines on the quality of evidence in RCTs, the main objective of this systematic review was to determine whether RCTs on dental caries prevention conform to these guidelines. The secondary objective was to assess the association between CONSORT adherence and the year and impact factor of the journal in which the study was published.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in different databases using appropriate terms to retrieve RCTs that assessed the caries-preventive effect of at least 2 of the following materials-fluoride varnish, resin-based fissure sealants, and ionomer-based fissure sealants-on the occlusal surfaces of permanent molars. Since the first CONSORT statement was published in 1996, a time frame from 1997 to 2020 was established for the identification of studies. Selected articles were assessed according to their adherence to the CONSORT statement, risk of bias (Cochrane risk of bias tool, RoB 2.0), and journal impact factor based on the InCites Journal Citation Reports. The year of publication and other relevant data were also recorded. SPSS (SPSS Statistics 25.0, IBM©) was used to perform the linear correlation analyses to determine the relationship between the article CONSORT score (previously determined) and the year of publication and journal impact factor. A significance level of 5% was established for all analyses.

RESULTS

Of 3196 references retrieved, 30 articles were selected and evaluated. Using RoB 2.0, 8 studies were classified as having a high risk of bias, 16 as having some concerns about the risk of bias assessment, and 6 as having a low risk of bias. Concerning CONSORT adherence, 77% of the studies adequately reported the intervention domain, since the methodology for the application of fluoride varnish or sealant materials was thoroughly described. However, the participants' setting and location, random sequence generation, randomization, and the flowchart description of the losses/exclusions domains were poorly reported. Meanwhile, the allocation concealment process was not reported in 83% of the articles. Correlation analyses indicated a positive relationship between CONSORT adherence and the year of publication, as well as the journal impact factor.

CONCLUSION

When assessing clinical trials on the prevention of occlusal caries, most RCTs examined followed the CONSORT statement. However, some methodological domains remain poorly reported, demonstrating the need to improve CONSORT compliance in these RCTs.

Quality of reporting for randomised clinical trials published in Latin American and Spanish journals: A protocol for a systematic survey of three clinical specialities

INTRODUCTION

Quality of reporting refers to how published articles communicate how the research was done and what was found. Gaps and imprecisions of reporting hamper the assessment of the methodological quality and internal and external validity. The CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) are a set of evidence-based recommendations of the minimum elements to be included in the reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to ensure a complete and transparent account of what was done, how it was done and what was found. Few studies have been conducted on the impact of CONSORT on RCTs published in Latin American and Spanish journals. We aim to assess the reporting quality of RCTs of three clinical specialities published in Spanish and Latin American journals, as well as to assess changes over time and associations of quality with journal and country indicators.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a systematic survey of all RCTs published in Spanish-language journals in three clinical fields (dentistry, neurology and geriatrics) from 1990 to 2018. We will include RCTs from previous work that has identified all RCTs on these medical fields published in Spain and Latin America. We will update this work via handsearching of relevant journals. Assessment of quality of reporting will be conducted independently and in duplicate using the CONSORT 2010 Statement. We will also extract journal and country indicators. We will conduct descriptive statistics and secondary analyses considering the year, country, and journal of publication, among others.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Universidad de Santiago de Chile's ethics committee approved the protocol. We will disseminate the results of this work in peer-reviewed scientific journals and conference proceedings. We expect to raise awareness among researchers, journal editors and funders on the importance of training in reporting guidelines and using them from the inception of RCT protocols.

Are combined bleaching techniques better than their sole application? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to answer this research question: "Does combined in-office (IO) and at-home (AH) bleaching produce improved color change and lower tooth sensitivity (TS) better than solely AH or IO bleaching in adults?"

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Randomized controlled trials in adults that compared combined versus sole application bleaching were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Meta-analyses were conducted for color change in shade guide units (∆SGU) and with a spectrophotometer (∆E*), risk, and intensity of TS, using the random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran's Q test and I² statistics. GRADE assessed the quality of the evidence. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, Cochrane Library, SIGLE, IADR abstracts, unpublished, ongoing trial registries, dissertations, and theses were searched on August 28, 2017 (updated on January 29, 2019).

RESULTS

Twelve studies remained. Two were considered to have low RoB. For combined vs. IO bleaching, no significant difference for ∆E*, ∆SGU, and risk of TS were observed; data were not available to analyze the intensity of TS. For combined vs. AH bleaching, no significant difference for ∆E*, ∆SGU, but lower TS to risk (RR 1.40, 95% 1.10 to 1.80) and intensity (MD 1.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.63) were detected for AH bleaching. Quality of evidence was graded as low or very low in all meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

Lower risk and intensity of TS was observed for the solely AH group without jeopardizing color change. However, more studies are still encouraged due to the low quality of evidence for most of the outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

If clinicians are to choose between combined or sole AH bleaching, the solely AH may be preferable; combined bleaching may potentiate the risk of TS without benefits in color change. For combined or sole IO bleaching, no important clinical difference in color change and risk of TS were detected; however, intensity of TS could not be compared due to lack of data. Further studies should be conducted due to the low/very low quality of the evidence.

Does the Use of Reservoirs Have Any Impact on the Efficacy of At-Home Bleaching? A Systematic Review

Abstract To answer the following focused question through a systematic review: “Are the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS) and bleaching efficacy different between adult patients who undergo at-home bleaching using trays with reservoirs and those who use trays without reservoirs?”. A comprehensive search was performed in the MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Brazilian Library in Dentistry, Cochrane Library, and grey literature without restrictions. Abstracts from conferences; unpublished and ongoing trial registries, dissertations and theses (ProQuest Dissertations and Periódicos Capes Theses databases) were searched. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. We used the Risk of Bias tool (RoB) from the Cochrane Collaboration for quality assessment. After the removal of duplicates, title and abstract screening and full-text examination, nine RCTs remained for qualitative analyses. The great majority of the studies did not report the method of randomization, allocation concealment, and examiner blinding during color assessment. From the nine studies, eight were at unclear risk of bias. In regard to color change, four studies reported no change and two reported improved color change with reservoirs. Only four studies recorded tooth sensitivity and they reported no significant differences. Only one study reported greater gingival irritation with reservoirs. Lack of data reporting prevented us from running a meta-analysis. Further well-designed RCT should be conducted to answer this research question. So far there is not evidence to support that reservoirs in bleaching trays improve color change. PROSPERO - CRD42016037628

Clinical performance of bulk-fill and conventional resin composite restorations in posterior teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the clinical performance of bulk-fill resin composites with conventional resin composites used for direct restorations of posterior teeth.

METHODS

This review followed the PRISMA statement. This review was registered at PROSPERO (registration number CRD42016053436). A search of the scientific literature was performed by two independent reviewers using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from commencement until January 2018. The research question was "Do bulk-fill resin composites have a clinical performance comparable to conventional resin composites in posterior restorations?" Only studies evaluating class I and II direct restorations in permanent teeth with a follow-up period of at least 1 year were included. The RevMan 5 program was used for meta-analysis, calculating the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the dichotomous outcome (restoration failure or success).

RESULTS

Ten articles were selected, comprising 941 analyzed restorations. The mean follow-up period was 33.6 months (12-72 months). No statistically significant differences in the failure rate were observed between conventional and base/flowable bulk-fill resin composites (p = 0.31; RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.69-3.25) or full-body/sculptable bulk-fill resin composites (p = 0.12; RR 1.89; 95% CI 0.84-4.24).

CONCLUSIONS

The present systematic review and meta-analysis indicate similar clinical performances of bulk-fill and conventional resin composites over a follow-up period of 12 to 72 months.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Based on the results of this study, the bulk-fill resin composites could be an alternative for direct restorations in posterior teeth. However, clinical trials of longer duration are required.

In-office dental bleaching with light vs. without light: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to answer the following research question: Does light-activated in-office vital bleaching have a greater whitening efficacy and higher tooth sensitivity (TS) in comparison with in-office vital bleaching without light when used in adults?

DATA AND SOURCE

Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving adults who had in-office bleaching with and without light activation were included. Controlled vocabulary and keywords were used in a comprehensive search for titles and abstracts in PubMed, and this search was adapted for Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, Cochrane Library, and SIGLE without restrictions in May 2016 and was updated in August 2017. IADR abstracts (1990-2016), unpublished- and ongoing-trial registries, dissertations, and theses were also searched. The risk-of-bias tool of the Cochrane Collaboration was used for quality assessment. The quality of the evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations: Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Through the use of the random effects model, a meta-analysis with a subgroup analysis (low and high hydrogen peroxide concentration) was conducted for color change (ΔE*, ΔSGU) as well as the risk and intensity of TS.

STUDY SELECTION

We retrieved 6663 articles, but after removing duplicates and non-relevant articles, only 21 RCTs remained. No significant difference in ΔE*, ΔSGU, and risk and intensity of TS was observed (p > .05). For ΔE and risk of TS, the quality of the evidence was graded as moderate whereas the evidence for ΔSGU and intensity of TS was graded as very low and low, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Without considering variations in the protocols, the activation of in-office bleaching gel with light does not seem to improve color change or affect tooth sensitivity, regardless of the hydrogen peroxide concentration. (PROSPERO - CRD42016037630).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Although it is commercially claimed that in-office bleaching associated with light improves and accelerates color change, this study did not confirm this belief for in-office bleaching gels with either high or low levels of hydrogen peroxide.