Use of high- and low-intensity lasers in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity: A literature review

Ozone and Laser Effects on Dentin Hypersensitivity Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of diode laser and ozone gas in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity (DHS).

METHODS

One hundred thirty-two teeth from 44 patients with moderate DHS were randomized into 3 groups according to a split-mouth design. In the diode laser group, the operator irradiated the superficial dentin exposed with an 808-nm wavelength and incremental power from 0.2 to 0.6 W with a 20-second interval. In the ozone gas group, the operator applied a high dose of ozone (32 g/m3) for 30 seconds using a silicon cup. In the placebo group, no therapy was applied. The dentin sensitivity level was evaluated upon enrollment (T0), immediately after treatment (T1), 3 months post-treatment (T2), and 6 months post-treatment (T3) with a cold air blast challenge and tactile stimuli. The pain severity was quantified according to the visual analogue scale. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to scrutinize potential statistical disparities among the treatments. Statistical significance was predetermined at P < .05.

RESULTS

A significant decrease of DHS was observed in the ozone gas group and the `diode laser group immediately after treatment and after 3 and 6 months of the therapy. After 6 months from the therapy, the sensitivity values in the teeth treated with ozone gas remained statistically lower than those treated with diode lasers (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

A laser diode and ozone gas are both efficient as dentin sensitivity treatment. Ozone maintains an invariable effectiveness after 6 months.

Comparative Evaluation of Er: YAG Laser, Diode Laser, and Novamin Technology for Dentinal Tubule Occlusion: An In-Vitro Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Analysis (EDX) Study

BACKGROUND

Dentinal hypersensitivity is a brief and painful oral condition that is characterized by an abrupt shooting sensation. Stimulation occurs when hot, cold, sweet, or sour food comes into contact with exposed dentinal tubules. The present study used a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX) to investigate the efficacy of Er: YAG, 810 nm diode LASER, and NovaMin Technology in obstructing dentinal tubules.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We extracted the outer layers of 30 human teeth to expose the tubules and then treated the surfaces with 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) to create an etched effect. Three cohorts were created from the portions. Group A was subjected to the application of Erbium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Er: YAG) laser with a power output of 2W in the non-contact mode for 1 minute. Group B was subjected to the application of an 810nm diode laser with a power output of 1W in continuous mode for 30 seconds. Group C was subjected to the application of NovaMin paste, which contains a 927 ppm fluoride content. Following the therapy, occluded dentinal tubules were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) for both quantitative and qualitative examination. The data analysis was conducted using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test, with a significance threshold of 0.05.

RESULTS

The average percentages of complete blockage of dentinal tubules in Groups A, B, and C were evaluated using the number of entirely unobstructed dentinal tubules at magnifications of 2000X (F = 3.05, p = 0.064), 5000X (F = 5.33, p = 0.011), and 10000X (F = 8.63, p = 0.001). The count of partially open dentinal tubules seen at magnifications of 2000X, 5000X, and 10000X was F = 10.15 (P < 0.001), F = 5.97 (p = 0.007), and F = 2.12 (p = 0.140) accordingly.

CONCLUSION

NovaMin technology has demonstrated more effectiveness in blocking dentinal tubules compared to 810nm diodes and Er: YAG lasers.

A novel treatment based on powder jet deposition technique for dentin hypersensitivity: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dentin hypersensitivity (DH) treatment using a newly developed device based on a powder jet deposition (PJD) technique that creates a hydroxyapatite (HAP) layer on the dentin surface, thereby alleviating the hypersensitivity. The effect of the PJD treatment was compared with that of conventional treatment using Teethmate Desensitizer (TMD; calcium-phosphate containing material with TTCP (Ca4(PO4)2O) and DCPA (CaHPO4)), which has been used clinically in Japan with well-confirmed effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted including 35 patients who had symptoms of DH in two or more quadrants. Two test teeth were selected per patient (70 teeth in total) and randomly assigned to PJD or TMD treatment. The efficacy was evaluated using the improvement rate for air and scratch pain according to the scores obtained via visual analog scale 12 weeks after treatment. The safety assessment was performed focusing on gingival index (GI) and spontaneous pain. The t-test was used to analyze the non-inferiority of PJD treatment compared to TMD treatment.

RESULTS

The improvement rate of air pain was 69.0% for PJD and 69.7% for TMD. The improvement rate of scratch pain was 80.8% for PJD and 81.7% for TMD. Non-inferiority with a margin of 10% was not observed for both air and scratch pain. No change was observed in GI from baseline and the improvement rate of spontaneous pain for PJD was higher than that for TMD.

CONCLUSION

Non-inferiority of PJD to TMD treatment was not observed in this study; however, it was not statistically demonstrated, and the results were thus interpreted as inconclusive. PJD did improve the DH symptoms, as did TMD. PJD's therapeutic effect was most likely attributable to the deposition of a HAP layer on the tooth surface, which would alleviate hypersensitivity for at least 12 weeks without causing severe adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR. ID: UMIN000025022. date: 02/12/2016.

Is silver diamine fluoride effective in reducing dentin hypersensitivity? A systematic review

Background

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the clinical efficacy (sensitivity reduction) and safety (gum damage) of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) as a tooth desensitizer for adults.

Methods

The search strategy was developed and adapted from 12 databases. Two independent reviewers selected the studies in consensus with a third reviewer. Randomized clinical trials with adult volunteers affected by dentin hypersensitivity (DH), and receiving treatment with SDF were included. Studies with volunteers testing tooth whitening products, using some type of desensitizer, or taking analgesic or anti-inflammatory medication were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed according to the RoB 2 tool, and confidence in cumulative evidence, according to GRADE.

Results

Only 3 articles were included. The average pain assessed using the visual analog scale was lower in the SDF groups than in the short-term control groups (24h to 7 days) (P=0.0134 and P=0.0015) of the two studies. The third study evaluated a combination of SDF and a CO2 laser, compared to using only SDF, and found no statistical difference between the two (P=0.74). Inflammation and gingival staining were also evaluated in two of the three studies. No adverse effects were reported. All the included studies had a high risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence was very low.

Conclusion

SDF can be used as a safe and effective tooth desensitizer in adults, with good results, as was achieved in a short-term follow-up. However, more studies with longer evaluation periods are required.

Evaluation of Two Pain Assessment Methods (Tactile and Air blast) for Comparison the Effectiveness of Nd:YAG Laser Therapy and Non-Laser Therapy on Dentin Hyper Sensitivity Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Statement of the Problem

Dentin hypersensitivity (DH) is a common irritating condition. A precise sensitive test for its assessment can greatly aid in appropriate treatment planning.

Purpose

This meta-analysis aims to compare the air blast and tactile tests for assessment of the efficacy Nd:YAG laser therapy versus non-laser treatments for DH in short-term and long-term follow-ups.

Materials and Method

For this review, an electronic search of the literature was carried out in three databases by two researchers for English articles published until March 10, 2021. Pooling of the data extracted from the selected articles was performed according to the PRISMA statement by the random-effect model. The mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of pain score before the treatment onset and during the follow-up period according to the visual analog scale (VAS) were calculated. The level of heterogeneity was assessed by the I₂ test, and a funnel plot was drawn to assess the publication bias of the reviewed studies.

Results

Of 152 articles primarily retrieved, 9 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) using the air blast test and 4 RCTs using the tactile test were subjected to quantitative synthesis. In the short-term follow-up and immediately after treatment, the air blast test showed superiority of laser therapy compared with non-laser treatments (SMD: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.05-1.04, p= 0.03). However, this difference was not significant according to the tactile test (SMD: 0.48. 95% CI: 0.01-0.96, p= 0.06). In the long-term follow-up, the difference between laser therapy and non-laser modalities was not significant according to both air blast (SMD= -0.38, 95% CI: -1.43-0.67, p= 0.48) and tactile (SMD=0.0, 95% CI: -0.38-0.38, p= 0.99) tests.

Conclusion

Comparison of laser therapy and non-laser modalities in the short-term reveal-ed higher sensitivity of the air blast test due to its mechanism of action compared with the tactile test. Further studies are required to interpret the results in the long-term follow-up.

The effect of combination treatment of CO2-laser irradiation and tetracalcium phosphate/dicalcium phosphate anhydrate on dentinal tubules blockage: an in vitro study

The aim of this study was the evaluation of the in vitro efficacy of a carbon dioxide (CO2) laser, a tetracalcium phosphate/dicalcium phosphate anhydrate (TP/DP) desensitizer and the combination of the desensitizer and additional CO2 laser irradiation as a treatment modality for cervical dentin hypersensitivity. A total of 48 dental specimens, prepared from extracted human premolars and molars, were divided into four groups: a control group, a TP/DP desensitizer paste group, a CO2 laser (10.600-nm wavelength) group, and a paste and laser group. The specimens were coated with nail varnish except in the marked area and were then immersed in 2% methylene blue dye for 1 h. The specimens were then washed, dried, and cut longitudinally. Thereafter, photos of 40 dentin specimens were taken and evaluated. The area of penetration was assessed and reported as percentage of the dentin surface area. Additionally eight dental specimens were examined with the aid of a scanning electron microscope and evaluated. Significant differences in the penetration depth were found for all experimental groups compared to the control group. The lowest penetration area was detected in the paste-laser group (16.5%), followed by the laser (23.7%), the paste (48.5%), and the control group (86.2%). The combined treatment of the CO2 laser and a TP/DP desensitizer was efficient in sealing the dentinal surface and could be a treatment option for cervical dentin hypersensitivity.

Efficacy of 810 nm and 650 nm Diode Laser Alone and in Combination With Sodium Fluoride Gel in Treating Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Study

Introduction Dentin hypersensitivity has been defined as a short, sharp pain caused by exposing naked dentin to external stimuli such as evaporation, heat, cold, osmotic liquids, and tactile effects. None of the available treatments has been considered the gold standard in treating dentin hypersensitivity. The use of laser has recently become more popular, and it is a promising treatment method in this field. The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of both 810 nm and 650 nm diode lasers in treating dentin hypersensitivity. Materials and methods This study was conducted on six patients who were referred to the Department of Oral Medicine, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Damascus University (4 females and 2 males) with 108 teeth suffering from generalized dentin hypersensitivity and were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of three patients with 50 teeth treated with an 810 nm diode laser; it was divided by the split-mouth design into two subgroups. The first subgroup was treated by the application of the laser alone toward the target area with 1-watt power, continuous mode, and a total application time of 90 seconds, and the second subgroup was treated by applying sodium fluoride gel for one minute, then the laser was applied with the same settings as the first subgroup. Group 2 consisted of three patients with 58 teeth treated with a 650 nm diode laser; it was divided by the split-mouth design into two subgroups. The first subgroup was treated by the application of the laser alone toward the target area with 200 m watt power, continuous mode, and a total application time of 120 seconds, and the second subgroup was treated by applying sodium fluoride gel for one minute and then applying the laser with the same settings as the first subgroup. The pain was evaluated using a numeric rating scale (NRS) of 100 degrees before and immediately after treatment, and then after three to six and nine months by applying an air stream from a dental chair syringe at a distance of 0.5 cm from the target area. Results This study showed that both types of lasers were effective in treating pain caused by dentinal hypersensitivity. The average values ​​of pain reduction on the NRS showed the superiority of the 810 nm diode laser over the 650 nm after treatment and at all time points of pain assessment. No statistically significant differences were detected between applying laser alone and applying it combined with sodium fluoride gel in pain reduction values. Conclusions The application of an 810 nm diode laser either alone or in combination with sodium fluoride gel in treating dentin hypersensitivity is effective and better than the application of a 650 nm diode laser either alone or in combination with sodium fluoride gel. In addition, applying a 650 nm diode laser either alone or in combination with sodium fluoride gel has slight effectiveness in treating dentine hypersensitivity, and it is believed that a single treatment session with a 650 nm diode laser was not enough to obtain the required pain reduction.

Phototherapy Using Er,Cr:YSGG Laser as a Definitive Treatment for Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Systematic Review

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of Er,Cr:YSGG lasers in reducing dentine hypersensitivity (DH).

Methods

Electronic literature were searched through various databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, ProQuest, LILACS and EBSCO) up to March 2022 for articles addressing the following focused question: “In patients with dentine hypersensitivity, does an Er,Cr:YSGG laser provide a better outcome in terms of pain reduction than other dentine desensitizer agents?”. The literature was searched using combinations of the following medical subject heading (MeSH) terms and keywords: (laser OR phototherapy OR Er,Cr:YSGG laser) AND (dentine hypersensitivity OR dentine sensitivity OR dental sensitivity).

Results

A total of 486 studies were found, of which 7 randomized controlled trials were included in the review. The Er,Cr:YSGG laser wavelengths, power density and duration of irradiation used in the studies were 2780 nanometers, 0.25–0.5 watts and 20–60 seconds, respectively. The follow-up assessments were conducted ranging from immediately to 3 months after treatment. All studies showed that the Er,Cr:YSGG laser was effective in alleviating DH.

Conclusion

This systematic review suggests that the application of an Er,Cr:YSSG laser is effective in alleviating DH and may have limited adverse effects if adequate parameters are followed.

Comparative Evaluation of the Effects of Diode Laser and Desensitizing Agents on the Treatment of Dentin Hypersensitivity: a Clinical Study

Background:

Dentine hypersensitivity (DH) is a frequent clinical problem that represents a long-term painful discomfort for the patients, and for the dentists, it represents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge.

Objective:

The aim of the research is to verify the effect of the treatment with diode laser SiroLaser Blue (660nm) of DH alone or in combination with different impregnating agents.

Methods:

Fifty patients were included in this research, separated into five groups. All the patients have been asked to define the level of dentine hypersensitivity using VAS (0-10). The first group was treated with Fluor Protector, the second group after the application of Fluor Protector has undergone irradiation with SiroLaser Blue (660nm), the third group was treated with impregnating agent Vivasens, the fourth group, after the application of impregnating agent Vivasens, has had SiroLaser Blue (660nm) irradiation. The fifth group has just been treated with SiroLaser Blue (660nm). The efficiency of the treatment was checked using VAS for every group immediately after the conducted treatment, after 7 days and 1 month.

Results:

Our results showed that all of the desensitizing agents used in the research alone or in combination with a diode laser (660nm) have shown a reduction of DH. The difference has been proven statistically significant in mean values by groups and examinations. Vivasens and diode laser irradiation have provided the best results in the review of mean values after the first examination and one month after the treatment of DH (p<0,05). In our research, the application of diode laser alone has not proven superior to other treatment methods that have been used in the research.

Conclusion:

Vivasens plus diode laser irradiation has provided the best results even after one month since the treatment of DH.