Clinical Efficacy of Different Dentin Desensitizers

The Effectiveness of Calcium Phosphates in the Treatment of Dentinal Hypersensitivity: A Systematic Review

Dentin hypersensitivity (DH) pain is a persistent clinical problem, which is a common condition known to affect patients' quality of life (QoL), but no treatment has ever been agreed upon. Calcium phosphates, available in different forms, have properties that allow sealing the dentinal tubules, which may relieve dentin hypersensitivity. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the ability of different formulations of calcium phosphate to reduce dentin hypersensitivity pain level in clinical studies. The inclusion criterion was as follows: clinical randomized controlled studies using calcium phosphates in treating dentin hypersensitivity. In December 2022, three electronic databases (Pubmed, Cochrane and Embase) were searched. The search strategy was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The bias assessment risks results were carried out using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. A total of 20 articles were included and analyzed in this systematic review. The results show that calcium phosphates have properties that reduce DH-associated pain. Data compilation showed a statistically significant difference in DH pain level between T0 and 4 weeks. This VAS level reduction is estimated at about -2.5 compared to the initial level. The biomimetic and non-toxic characteristics of these materials make them a major asset in treating dentin hypersensitivity.

Evaluation of Dentin Tubule Plugging Efficiencies and Effects on Dentin Surface Roughness of Dentin Desensitizing Agents, the Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, and Their Combination After Erosion-Abrasion Cycles: An In Vitro Study

OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this in vitro study were to evaluate the tubule plugging efficiencies and effects on the surface roughness of dentin of different dentin desensitizing agents (DDAs; Teethmate Desensitizer, Kuraray; Gluma Desensitizer, Kulzer; Clinpro White Varnish, 3M ESPE; Enamelast, Ultradent) and the Er,Cr:YSGG laser (Biolase, Waterlase), both alone and in combination with DDAs, after application and after an erosion-abrasion cycle.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

For surface roughness examinations, superficial buccal dentin specimens were divided into 10 groups: the control, Teethmate Desensitizer, Gluma Desensitizer, Enamelast, Clipro White Varnish, Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, Teethmate Desensitizer-Laser, Gluma Desensitizer-Laser, and Enamelast-Laser, and Clinpro White Varnish-Laser groups. Profilometric analyses and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) examinations were performed after applications and after a 5-day erosive-abrasive cycle. For the statistical analysis of surface roughness measurements, 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), 1-way ANOVA, and Tukey post hoc test were used.

RESULTS

Among the treatments, only DDAs alone did not cause increase in surface roughness after application. All of the laser applications increased the surface roughness of dentin, and after the erosion-abrasion cycle, all of the test groups had increased surface roughness. However, SEM images showed that morphological changes were less frequently observed in all of the experimental groups than in the control group. In addition, all of the laser-DDA combinations had stronger tubule occlusion effects than did DDAs alone, even after erosion-abrasion.

CONCLUSIONS

All of the test treatments showed protective effects on dentin surfaces against the negative effects of erosion-abrasion. The addition of the laser to DDA applications increased tubular plugging efficiencies of DDAs, and the tubule plugs of the combination treatments were resistant to the erosion-abrasion cycle.

Efficacy of a calcium-phosphate/fluoride varnish and ionomeric sealant on cervical dentin hypersensitivity: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study

BACKGROUND

Dentin hypersensitivity (DH) is a common problem in the population that can have a significant impact on the quality of life of those who suffer from the condition.

OBJECTIVES

Compare the efficacy of two treatments for DH: Ca/PO₄ ^- /F^- varnish (Clinpro White Varnish) and ionomeric sealant (IS) (Clinpro XT Varnish) with a placebo.

METHODS

Participants (121) with at least one tooth with visual analogue scale (VAS) score of 4 and above were randomly and blindly allocated to the groups. Treatments were performed by a trained researcher. DH was evaluated by another blind researcher after the treatment and after 1 week, 4 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. After 4 weeks, placebo received the DH treatment with IS; thus, the participants were not assessed after 3 and 6 months. Primary outcome was DH reduction after 4 weeks. Differences in VAS scores in the other time intervals and entire values of VAS were considered secondary outcomes. Comparisons were made among the groups (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

IS showed the highest VAS value difference between baseline and 4 weeks (mean ± SD: 3.7 ± 2.2), differing significantly from placebo (2.3 ± 1.7) and Ca/PO4/F^- varnish (2.6 ± 2.0). Ca/PO4^- /F^- varnish did not differ from placebo. In all time intervals, VAS values of all groups were significantly lower than the baseline value, without differences among groups. For the long-term differences in VAS values (3 and 6 months), the IS exhibited significantly higher values than Ca/PO4^- /F^- varnish.

CONCLUSIONS

The IS was the most efficacious product for reducing DH, whereas Ca/PO4^- /F^- varnish did not differ from placebo. Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04591444).

Efficacy of Desensitizers in Reducing Post-preparation Sensitivity Prior to a Fixed Dental Prosthesis: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Aims:

The aim of this article is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of Gluma, Shield Force Plus, and Telio CS desensitizers, in reducing pre- and post-cementation sensitivity for complete coverage restorations.

Materials and Methods:

The study was a double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial in which 56 patients requiring posterior three-unit fixed partial dentures were randomly assigned to four groups, each group with 14 patients (n = 14): Group C (Control group), Group GL (Gluma group), Group SF (Shield Force Plus group), and Group TC (Telio CS group). In the desensitizer groups, desensitizer application was performed following the manufacturer’s directions immediately after tooth preparation (first visit), before metal restoration try-in (second visit, 2 weeks after the first visit), and before final cementation (third visit, 2 weeks after the second visit). Sensitivity levels were scored and evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS), using cold test and electric pulp test (EPT) during the three visits before the cementation, and then over the phone 2 weeks after the final cementation. The data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post-hoc Bonferroni and unpaired t-tests.

Results:

One-way ANOVA revealed significant differences between the four groups. The post-hoc Bonferroni tests showed a significant decrease in the mean cold test scores from the first to third visit, with a p-value <0.001 for the GL, SF, and TS groups. The mean EPT scores also decreased significantly from the first to third visit (p< 0.001) for the GL and SF groups, whereas p = 0.023 for the TS group. Most of the subjects did not complain of any sensitivity post-cementation, except for one patient in Group TS.

Conclusion:

All three desensitizers were found to be effective in reducing pre- and post-cementation dentin sensitivity, as indicated by the consistent reduction in VAS scores throughout the visits.