Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 9, 2026
Confocal Time Lapse Imaging as an Efficient Method for the Cytocompatibility Evaluation of Dental Composites
Published on: November 9, 2014
In Vitro Evaluation of Chemical and Microhardness Alterations in Human Enamel Induced by Three Commercial In-Office
Berivan Laura Rebeca Buzatu1,2, Atena Galuscan1,2, Ramona Dumitrescu1,2
1Translational and Experimental Clinical Research Centre in Oral Health, Department of Preventive, Community Dentistry and Oral Health, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 300040 Timisoara, Romania.
Abstract:
Background/Objectives: In-office bleaching commonly employs high concentrations of hydrogen peroxide (HP) or carbamide peroxide (CP), which may compromise enamel integrity. This in vitro paired-design study aimed to compare the chemical and mechanical effects of three commercial bleaching agents-Opalescence Boost (40% HP), Opalescence Quick (45% CP), and BlancOne Ultra+ (35% HP)-on human enamel. The null hypothesis assumed no significant differences between the control and treated samples. Given the ongoing debate over pH, active ingredients, and enamel impact, comparing whitening systems remains clinically important. Methods: Forty-two extracted teeth were assigned to three experimental groups (n = 14) with matched controls. Each underwent a single bleaching session per manufacturer protocol: Opalescence Boost (≤60 min), Opalescence Quick (15-30 min), and BlancOne Ultra+ (three light-activated cycles of 8-10 min). Enamel chemical changes were analyzed by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (phosphate and carbonate bands), and surface hardness by Vickers microhardness testing. Paired t-tests (α = 0.05) assessed statistical significance. Results: FTIR analysis revealed alterations in phosphate and carbonate bands for all agents, most notably for Opalescence Boost and BlancOne Ultra+. Microhardness testing showed significant reductions in enamel hardness for Opalescence Boost (control: 37.21 ± 1.74 Hv; treated: 34.63 ± 1.70 Hv; p = 0.00) and Opalescence Quick (control: 45.82 ± 1.71 Hv; treated: 39.34 ± 1.94 Hv; p < 0.0001), whereas BlancOne Ultra+ showed no significant difference (control: 51.64 ± 1.59 HV; treated: 51.60 ± 2.34 Hv; p = 0.95). Conclusions: HP-based agents, particularly at higher concentrations, caused greater enamel alterations than CP-based products. While clinically relevant, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to in vitro limitations and natural enamel variability.
