Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 2393
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 473-478

Influence of light and laser activation of tooth bleaching systems on enamel microhardness and surface roughness

1 Centre for Restorative Dentistry Studies, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Sungai Buloh Campus, Jalan Hospital, Sungai Buloh, Selangor, Malaysia
2 Medini Setia Tropika Dental Clinic, Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
3 Department of General Dental Practice and Oral and Maxillofacial Imaging, Faculty of Dentistry, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Eleena Mohd Yusof
Centre for Restorative Dentistry Studies, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA Sg. Buloh, Jalan Hospital, 47000 Sungai Buloh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_509_20

Rights and Permissions

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the effects of light and laser activation of in-office tooth bleaching systems on enamel microhardness and surface roughness. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five enamel slabs were divided into three treatment groups: light-activated bleaching, laser-activated bleaching, and control. The baseline data were recorded for enamel microhardness (Vickers microhardness [VMH]) and surface roughness (Roughness average, Ra). The specimens were cured for 10 min upon hydrogen peroxide application for the light-activated bleaching group and activated with a laser source, 8 cycles, 10 s per cycle for the laser-activated group. The changes in VMH and Ra at days 1, 7, and 28 were evaluated. Kruskal–Wallis, Friedman, Wilcoxon, and Mann–Whitney tests were used to analyze both VMH and Ra between the treatment groups at different time intervals. Results: There were a significant reduction in VMH values and significant differences between days 1, 7, and 28 against the baseline in the light-activated bleaching group (P = 0.001). The Ra values revealed significant differences in both light- (P = 0.001) and laser-activated (P = 0.033) groups. Conclusion: Light activation of a bleaching agent caused a reduction in enamel microhardness and an increase in surface roughness when compared to laser activation.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal