Fluoride varnish versus glutaraldehyde for hypersensitive teeth: a randomized controlled trial, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Abstract

Reports indicate Gluma and Duraphat are commonly used in-office agents to treat hypersensitive teeth. Considering this, the aim of this paper is to compare Gluma and Duraphat using a randomized controlled trial, meta-analysis collating evidences from previous studies and trial sequential analysis. Thirty-eight participants were randomized. Hypersensitivity and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded at baseline, 5min and 7days. Oral health-related quality of life (OHIP) questionnaire was administered at baseline and 7days. Statistical analysis was performed to identify significant differences between the variables. For the meta-analysis, electronic data bases were searched and eligible data was extracted and analysed using RevMan 5.0. Trial sequential analysis was performed using O'Brien-Fleming boundary approach for the primary outcome. Both agents caused significant reduction in hypersensitivity and VAS score at 5min and 7days in the randomized trial with no superiority. The quality of life significantly improved in patients treated with both the agents. Four studies including the present trial in meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis indicated that Gluma produced significant reduction in VAS scores at 7days. Gluma produces significant reduction in hypersensitivity at 7days post treatment compared with Duraphat. There is definite lack of evidence on the long-term effect of these agents. This paper provides strong evidence on the use of Gluma for hypersensitive teeth. This also is a way forward to future research on long-term effects, adverse effects and cost-effectiveness studies.