Clinical evaluation of two desensitizing treatments in southern Brazil: A 3-month follow-up

Photobiomodulation therapy and 3% potassium nitrate gel as treatment of cervical dentin hypersensitivity: a randomized clinical trial

Objectives

This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate different protocols for dentin hypersensitivity treatment with low-power lasers and desensitizing agents, and the association between low-power lasers and desensitizing agents.

Materials and methods

Fifty-four patients (303 teeth) were randomly allocated to three groups: G1, 3% nitrate potassium gel, UltraEZ (n = 17); G2, photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) with a low-level infrared laser (n = 17), 100 mW, spot size of 0.028 cm², and dose of 1 J per point; and G3, nitrate potassium + PBM (n = 20). Treatments were applied to the buccal cervical region at intervals of 72 h, and all protocols were performed in three sessions. The patients’ response to evaporative stimuli was rated using the visual analog scale (VAS). Re-evaluations were performed immediately after each application and 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after treatment. A two-way repeated measures test and Tukey’s post hoc test were used for multiple comparisons (α = 5%).

Results

There was a reduction in pain levels at the end of treatment in all groups. There were no significant differences in VAS score changes between the groups immediately after treatment and after the third month, compared to the baseline (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Under the limitations of this in vivo study, the proposed three-session protocol was effective in reducing dentin hypersensitivity after 3 months, regardless of the desensitization mechanism used. Conservative and long-term protocols are interesting for the control of pain caused by dentin hypersensitivity.

Clinical relevance

The increase in cervical dentin hypersensitivity prevalence warrants easy-to-apply and long-lasting desensitizing protocols for pain control.

Effects of low-level light therapy on dentin hypersensitivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the treatment efficacy of low-level light therapy on dentin hypersensitivity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Following the PRISMA guideline, six electronic databases supplemented with bibliographies were searched till December 2020. Two reviewers performed the screenings independently with a reliability assessment. Studies fulfilling the pre-registered eligibility criteria were included for risk-of-bias assessment and data synthesis.

RESULTS

Thirty-five articles ultimately informed this systematic review based on the eligibility criteria and underwent risk-of-bias assessment (ĸ = 0.86). Quantitative results were deduced by meta-analysis of 20 randomised controlled trials: LLLT showed favourable outcomes compared to placebos for immediate (SMD: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.70), interim (SMD: 1.32, 95% CI: 0.41 to 2.23), and persistent efficacies (SMD: 2.86, 95% CI: 1.98 to 3.74). However, substantial heterogeneity existed among included studies (I2: 64-95%). Regarding comparisons with other desensitising strategies, LLLT showed no significant benefits in DH alleviation over others except fluorides for interim efficacy (SMD: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.52) and persistent efficacy (SMD: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review shows that LLLT has positive immediate, interim, and persistent DH-treatment efficacies compared with placebo. No superior treatment effects of LLLT were observed except fluoride agent use. Further studies are warranted-RCTs with low risk of bias, consistent technical settings, comprehensive assessments, and long follow-up periods.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This systematic review bridges a critical research gap by analysing clinical evidence in the DH-alleviating efficacy of LLLT in comparison with placebo and other in-office desensitising strategies.

Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

Dentinal hypersensitivity is characterized by short, sharp pain from exposed dentine that occurs in response to external stimuli such as cold, heat, osmotic, tactile or chemicals, and cannot be explained by any other form of dental defect or pathology. Laser therapy has become a commonly used intervention and might be effective for dentinal hypersensitivity.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of in-office employed lasers versus placebo laser, placebo agents or no treatment for relieving pain of dentinal hypersensitivity.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 20 October 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2020, Issue 9), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 20 October 2020), Embase Ovid (1980 to 20 October 2020), CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to 20 October 2020), and LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; from 1982 to 20 October 2020). Conference proceedings were searched via the ISI Web of Science and ZETOC, and OpenGrey was searched for grey literature. The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which in-office lasers were compared to placebo or no treatment on patients aged above 12 years with tooth hypersensitivity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently and in duplicate screened the search results, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Disagreement was resolved by discussion. For continuous outcomes, we used mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We conducted meta-analyses only with studies of similar comparisons reporting the same outcome measures. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 23 studies with 936 participants and 2296 teeth. We assessed five studies at overall low risk of bias, 13 at unclear, and five at high risk of bias. 17 studies contributed data to the meta-analyses. We divided the studies into six subgroups based on the type of laser and the primary outcome measure. We assessed the change in intensity of pain using quantitative pain scale (visual analogue scale (VAS) of 0 to 10 (no pain to worst possible pain)) when tested through air blast and tactile stimuli in three categories of short (0 to 24 hours), medium (more than 24 hours to 2 months), and long term (more than 2 months). Results demonstrated that compared to placebo or no treatment the application of all types of lasers combined may reduce pain intensity when tested through air blast stimuli at short term (MD -2.24, 95% CI -3.55 to -0.93; P = 0.0008; 13 studies, 978 teeth; low-certainty evidence), medium term (MD -2.46, 95% CI -3.57 to -1.35; P < 0.0001; 11 studies, 1007 teeth; very low-certainty evidence), and long term (MD -2.60, 95% CI -4.47 to -0.73; P = 0.006; 5 studies, 564 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, compared to placebo or no treatment the application of all types of lasers combined may reduce pain intensity when tested through tactile stimuli at short term (MD -0.67, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.03; P = 0.04; 8 studies, 506 teeth; low-certainty evidence) and medium term (MD -1.73, 95% CI -3.17 to -0.30; P = 0.02; 9 studies, 591 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). However, there was insufficient evidence of a difference in pain intensity for all types of lasers when tested through tactile stimuli in the long term (MD -3.52, 95% CI -10.37 to 3.33; P = 0.31; 2 studies, 184 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). Most included studies assessed adverse events and reported that no obvious adverse events were observed during the trials. No studies investigated the impact of laser treatment on participants' quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Limited and uncertain evidence from meta-analyses suggests that the application of laser overall may improve pain intensity when tested through air blast or tactile stimuli at short, medium, or long term when compared to placebo/no treatment. Overall, laser therapy appears to be safe. Future studies including well-designed double-blinded RCTs are necessary to further investigate the clinical efficacy of lasers as well as their cost-effectiveness.

Low level laser therapy, Er,Cr:YSGG laser and fluoride varnish for treatment of dentin hypersensitivity after periodontal surgery: A randomized clinical trial

This clinical trial aimed to compare the effects of low-level laser therapy (LLLT), Er,Cr;YSGG laser, and fluoride varnish, as compared to the placebo laser on decreasing dentin hypersensitivity (DH). This randomized, double-blinded clinical trial included 60 jaw quadrants in 24 patients who underwent periodontal surgery. The quadrants were randomly assigned to 4 groups and received treatments as follows. Group 1: LLLT with a combination of red and infrared wavelengths, group 2: Er,Cr:YSGG laser (0.25 W and 0.5 W), group 3: fluoride varnish, and group 4: placebo laser. The sensitivity response to the cold spray was recorded using visual analogue scale (VAS) at baseline, immediately, and 1 week post-treatment. The data were analyzed by repeated measures analysis at the significance level of P<0.05. There was a significant reduction in DH after treatment by low-level lasers, Er,Cr:YSGG laser, or fluoride varnish compared to the baseline data (P<0.05), but the placebo group displayed no significant alteration in DH (P=0.069). At 1 week, the VAS score in the Er,Cr:YSGG laser group was significantly lower than that of the LLLT (P= 0.043) and placebo (P<0.001) groups. Furthermore, the subjects who received fluoride varnish exhibited significantly lower DH compared with the placebo group (P = 0.023). Er,Cr:YSGG laser was the most effective strategy in dealing with DH, as it caused the greatest pain reduction over the study period and showed a significant superiority over LLLT and placebo groups. Alternatively, the application of fluoride varnish could be recommended for attenuating DH following periodontal surgery.

Low-power laser and potassium oxalate gel in the treatment of cervical dentin hypersensitivity-a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of different protocols for the treatment of cervical dentin hypersensitivity (CDH) in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The CONSORT checklist was used to design this study. The sample with n = 74 participants (389 NCCLs) was randomly allocated into three groups: G1, potassium oxalate (Oxa-Gel BF); G2, GaAlAs (gallium-aluminum-arsenate) low-power laser (100 mW, 808nn, 60 J/cm²); and G3, potassium oxalate (Oxa-Gel BF) associated with the GaAlAs low-power laser. The CDH was triggered by the evaporative stimulus test (EST) and by the tactile stimulus test (TST). The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to quantify the degree of CDH. Changes in sensitivity were assessed from baseline over 3 weeks. Data were analyzed for NCCLs using mixed-effects models with unstructured direct product covariance structure (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

After the first application, participants from G1 and G3 had a reduction in CDH (p < 0.05) compared with group G2 for TST. After the second application, G3 participants had a reduction in CDH (p < 0.05) in relation to G2 for both stimuli. Reduction in CDH (p < 0.05) occurred over 3 weeks for EST and TST for all groups; however, there was no difference between groups at the end of the therapies.

CONCLUSION

Potassium oxalate was more effective in reducing immediate CDH. After four applications, all groups showed similar results for the reduction of CDH.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

GaAlAS laser irradiation and oxalate potassium gel could reduce the symptoms of CDH; thus, they are viable alternatives for the treatment of this condition. Chemical occlusion of dental tubules showed effective results after a shorter time interval.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Brazilian Clinical Trials Registration Platform under protocol number RBR-4ybjmt. http://www.braziliantrials.com/?keywords=RBR-4ybjmt&order=%7Eensaios.patrocinador_primario.

Photobiomodulation in Endodontic, Restorative, and Prosthetic Dentistry: A Review of the Literature

Objective: To provide a review of the literature about the photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) dental treatment protocols in endodontic, restorative, and prosthetic dentistry based on validated clinical studies published so far. More specifically, this study was carried out to carefully review therapeutic protocol of PBMT in clinical studies and their conclusions. Background data: The importance of using low-power lasers and photobiomodulation (PBM) is increasing in dentistry mainly due to their painless and noninvasive function. However, lack of sufficient clinical studies has led to unclear results regarding PBMT in dentistry, and also lack of an available precise protocol for clinicians. Moreover, scarcity of clinical studies in this area has made conduction of a precise systematic review study difficult. Methods: In our study, published clinical studies up to April 2019 were reviewed from library sources, Google Scholar, PubMed and Medline, Elsevier, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of science (ISI). Inclusion criteria included those presented in clinical trials and case report/case series, language (English), and studies available in full text. Exclusion criterion was in vitro studies. Results: In general, findings of clinical studies have shown that PBMT can have a significant role in reducing postoperative dental pain, increasing depth of anesthesia, improving tooth hypersensitivity, reducing inflammation of the tissue, and helping wound healing. Conclusions: A review of clinical studies showed that the use of alternative or adjunctive PBMT is of great importance in controlling postoperative pain after endodontic treatments. In addition, evidence suggests that different parameters of light can be efficient in the treatment of tooth hypersensitivity. Nevertheless, lack of sufficient clinical studies and reliable results do not allow introducing a precise treatment protocol.

Laser Effects on the Prevention and Treatment of Dentinal Hypersensitivity: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Dentinal hypersensitivity (DH) is an acute intensive tooth pain which can lead to dental annoyances during eating and drinking. Stimulating exposed dentinal tubules by either kind of thermal, tactile, chemical and/or osmotic stimuli is believed to be the cause of this pain. It is hypothesized that dentinal tubules' orifice occlusion (DOO) can help relieve such dental irritations. Thus, this systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of laser application as a prevention and treatment modality on DH reduction. Methods: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS) were searched among randomized clinical trials from January 2007 to December 2016. The extraction of data and quality assessments were carried out by different independent observers. Results: A total of 499 items were found of which3 9 relevant articles were extracted. The profound findings proved lasers' effectiveness as a treatment of DH. Although some of the researches reported no significant difference between laser and other desensitizing agents, most of the studies suggested that better results (both rapid and long-lasting) were obtained in combined modalities. Furthermore, the preventive role of this new technology has been emphasized as well. Nd-YAG (neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet) and diode lasers reduce DH after bleaching. Lasers can also protect cervical restorations from DH due to tubular occlusion. Moreover, it is suggested to apply lasers in relief of DH following scaling and root planning. Nevertheless, a few researchers dispute its beneficence as a result of placebo effect. Conclusion: The results obtained from several studies in the present review revealed that the application of lasers is effective not only in terms of treatment of DH, but also in the prevention of this intensive tooth pain. Among various types of lasers, the application of Nd:YAG laser has shown the best results in DH treatment.

Higher Biostability of rh-aFGF-Carbomer 940 Hydrogel and Its Effect on Wound Healing in a Diabetic Rat Model

Hydrogels are excellent drug delivery carriers with excellent ductility. Here, we report the design of a higher biostability of a recombinant human acidic fibroblast growth factor (rh-aFGF) carbomer hydrogel formulation. To verify the optimality of this formula, we prepared various prescriptions and tested the resulting physical properties including micromorphology, long-term stability, accelerated stability, and destructive test. Furthermore, the efficacy for promoting wound healing in full-thickness injury and scald wound diabetic rat models was explored. We found that rh-aFGF-carbomer hydrogel had good physical properties. It was stable for 24 months at 5 ± 3 °C, and for 6 months at 25 ± 3 °C. In vivo, the rh-aFGF-carbomer 940 hydrogel achieved a remarkable promotion of skin wound healing in diabetic rats with full-thickness injuries or scald wounds. Our data suggest that rh-aFGF-carbomer hydrogel may have applications for the treatment of diabetic ulcers combined with other wounds.

Efficacy of a bioactive material and nanostructured desensitizing on dentin hypersensitivity treatment

Abstract Introduction Dentin hypersensitivity is a frequent occurrence in dental practice. It is clinically characterized by acute, short, and temporary pain in response to mechanical, chemical, thermal, or osmotic stimuli resulting from dentin exposure. Objective To compare in vivo the effect of an experimental crystalline bioactive material and nanostructured desensitizing on the pain assessment among patients with cervical dentin hypersensitivity. Material and method Thirty patients were selected for this study, who were randomly assigned to two groups (n=15) in a split-mouth design. Each patient received two treatments: group 1 (fluoride gel and bioactive material) and group 2 (fluoride gel and nanostructured desensitizing). Pain analyses were performed using a visual analogue scale, ranging 0-10. Baseline pain measurement was performed prior to initial treatment (T0) and new measurements were carried out weekly for 3 weeks (T1, T2, and T3) before materials were reapplied. Final pain analysis was performed 3 months after initial treatment (T4). Degree of pain reduction was calculated using the formula T0 - Tperiod after treatment. The data of the pain measurements were analyzed using 2-way repeated measure ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05). Result Regardless of evaluation period, there was no statistical difference on pain reduction between the treatments (p>0.05). The degree of pain was reduced significantly in each evaluated period for all tested treatments (p<0.05), by approximately three degrees after 3 months. Conclusion The tested desensitizing materials were effective on dentin hypersensitivity reduction.

Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: a literature review

The purpose of this literature review was to evaluate the effectiveness of the laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. A review with inclusion and exclusion criteria was performed from January 2009 to December 2014 with electronic data-bases: MedLine via PubMed, Science Direct and Cochrane Library. Research of paper magazines by hand was not considered. Forty-three articles were selected between literature reviews, in vitro studies, clinical trials, pilot and preliminary studies. The items were divided into laser-used groups for an accurate description, and then the reading of results into various typologies. Laser-assisted treatment reduces dentinal hypersensitivity-related pain, but also a psychosomatic component must be considered, so further studies and more suitable follow-ups are necessary.