Abstract
Aim: This randomized, double blind, split mouth study was aimed to compare three dentin desensitizing treatment modalities. Methods: Two hundred sixty teeth of 25 patients; each having at least 2 hypersensitive teeth in each quadrant, were included. Teeth were randomized to 4 groups: Group A treated with 2% NaF solution, Group B received GLUMA®; an aqueous solution of Hydroxy-Ethyl-Methacrylate and Glutarldehyde, (HEMA-G), Group C received iontophoresis with distilled water (placebo) and Group D was treated with NaF-iontophoresis. Pain response was evaluated on a visual analogue scale (VAS), by using tactile, air blast and cold-water stimuli at 0-day, 15-day, 1-month and 3-months interval. Results: All treatments were effective in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity significantly, Group D and Group B were more effective than Group A and Group C at all time intervals. Group D and Group B were equally effective in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity at 15-day and 1-month interval but Group D was more effective at 3-months. Conclusion: All treatment modalities were more effective in reducing hypersensitivity than placebo. 2% NaF-iontophoresis and HEMA-G were more effective than 2% NaF local application at all time intervals. But at 3-months, 2% NaF-iontophoresis was more effective than HEMA-G, while placebo produced no significant effect in reduction of hypersensitivity. Key words:Hypersensitivity, desensitisation, iontophoresis, dentin adhesive, sodium fluoride.
Highlights
Dentinal hypersensitivity is common clinical condition and an age-old complaint, presenting problems to both the patient and dentist and is reported to be relatively widely prevalent [1]
All treatment modalities were more effective in reducing hypersensitivity than placebo. 2% NaF-iontophoresis and hydroxyl-ethylmethacrylate and glutaraldehyde (HEMA-G) were more effective than 2% NaF local application at all time intervals
Drug A or 2% sodium fluoride induced mean reduction of hypersensitivity visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for all three test stimuli were 43%, 41%, 40% immediately after application on 0-day; which increased to 52%, 55%, 45% on the 15th day; and 35%, 34%, 36% after 1-month
Summary
Dentinal hypersensitivity is common clinical condition and an age-old complaint, presenting problems to both the patient and dentist and is reported to be relatively widely prevalent [1]. Sealing the dentinal tubules with a bonding agent or adhesive material has been suggested to create long lasting blockage of dentine hypersensitivity [14] One such product is an aqueous solution of hydroxyl-ethylmethacrylate and glutaraldehyde (HEMA-G), and a strong desensitizing effect of this system on dentin hypersensitivity has been reported [15,16]. It blocks the dentinal tubules by coagulation of the dentinal fluid proteins within the tubules, thereby counteracting the hydrodynamic mechanism of dentinal hypersensitivity. The comparative efficacies of various desensitizing treatments are still unclear in spite of availability of multiple treatment modalities, the present study was planned to evaluate and compare the efficacy of 2% sodium fluoride solution with and without iontophoresis with a commercially available adhesive desensitizing agent
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
