Comparison of Erythritol Air-Polishing and Conventional Polishing Following Ultrasonic Scaling on the Relapse of Chromogenic Tooth Staining in Children

July 22, 2026 updated by: Marmara University

Comparison of Erythritol Air-Polishing and Conventional Polishing Following Ultrasonic Scaling on the Relapse of Chromogenic Tooth Staining in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial

The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to compare the effect of erythritol air-polishing and conventional polishing following ultrasonic scaling on the relapse of chromogenic tooth staining in children aged 4-13 years attending the Pediatric Dentistry Clinic of Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry for routine dental examination.

The main questions this study aims to answer are:

  • Does erythritol air-polishing reduce the relapse of chromogenic tooth staining compared with conventional polishing following ultrasonic scaling?
  • Is there a difference in the time to relapse of chromogenic tooth staining between the two polishing techniques?

Researchers will compare conventional polishing (prophylaxis paste and a polishing brush) following ultrasonic scaling with erythritol air-polishing performed using the EMS air-polishing device following ultrasonic scaling to determine whether one method is more effective in preventing or delaying the relapse of chromogenic tooth staining.

Study Overview

Status

Not yet recruiting

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Participants will:

Undergo a routine oral examination. Receive professional removal of chromogenic tooth staining using ultrasonic scaling.

Be randomly assigned to receive either conventional polishing with prophylaxis paste and a polishing brush or erythritol air-polishing using the EMS air-polishing device.

Attend follow-up visits to assess the recurrence of chromogenic tooth staining over time.

Chromogenic tooth staining will be assessed using the Qraycam.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

56

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • MALTEPE
      • Istanbul, MALTEPE, Turkey (Türkiye), 34854
        • Marmara Üniversitesi Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Külliyesi Sağlık Yerleşkesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi
        • Contact:

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Children aged 4-13 years.
  • Absence of oral diseases, including gingivitis and oral mucosal diseases.
  • No orthodontic appliances.
  • No history of iron supplementation or professional fluoride treatment within the previous 3 months.
  • Systemically healthy children.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Presence of oral diseases, including periodontitis, salivary gland diseases, or oral mucosal diseases.
  • History of autoimmune disease.
  • Antibiotic use within the previous 3 months.
  • Consumption of tannin-containing beverages (e.g., tea, coffee, or similar beverages) within the previous 1 month.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Basic Science
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Group 1 (Erythritol Air-Polishing Using the EMS Air-Polishing Device)
Description: Participants assigned to Group 1 will receive professional removal of chromogenic tooth staining using ultrasonic scaling followed by erythritol air-polishing with the EMS air-polishing device, guided by a plaque-disclosing agent. At the end of the procedure, the investigator will record the treatment time, apply the plaque-disclosing agent, obtain intraoral photographs, and assess chromogenic tooth staining using the Qraycam.
Active Comparator: Group 2 (Conventional Polishing Using Prophylaxis Paste and a Polishing Brush)
Participants will undergo professional tooth cleaning using the ultrasonic scaler of the EMS device. The tooth surfaces will then be polished using a polishing brush and prophylaxis paste.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Black Stain Score
Time Frame: Baseline, immediately after polishing, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, and 6 months

Black Stain Classification (Gasparetto et al., 2003) Score Description Clinical Characteristics 0 None No black pigmentation on the tooth surface.

  1. Mild Pigmented dots or thin pigmented lines parallel to the gingival margin that are not continuous.
  2. Moderate Continuous pigmented lines o extending over up to one-half of the cervical third of the tooth surface.
  3. Severe Pigmentation extending over more than one-half of the cervical third of the tooth surface.

Black Stain Classification (Zerman et al., 2024) Score Description A Pigmented lines or dots present only on the buccal surface. B Pigmented lines or dots present on both the buccal and lingual surfaces. C Pigmented lines or dots associated with dental caries. D Recurrent pigmented lines or dots.

Baseline, immediately after polishing, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, and 6 months
Participant Feedback
Time Frame: Periprocedural
Pain perception during the procedure will be assessed using the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale. The scale ranges from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates "no pain" and 10 indicates "hurts worst." Higher scores indicate greater pain intensity (worse outcome).
Periprocedural
Time Session
Time Frame: Periprocedural
The duration of treatment is noted and compared between groups
Periprocedural

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

July 7, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

January 1, 2028

Study Completion (Estimated)

February 28, 2028

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 10, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 22, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

July 28, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

July 28, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 22, 2026

Last Verified

July 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • GBTvschromogenic

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.