Effect of three common desensitizers in reduction of the dentin hypersensitivity after periodontal surgery

Statement of Problem: Dentin hypersensitivity is one of the most common complaints of patients after periodontal treatments which occur after tissue shrinkage

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine and compare the effectiveness of sensikin gel [10% potassium nitrate and 0.22% sodium fluoride] with sodium fluoride gel [2.7%] and fluoride varnish [5%] in reducing the dentin hypersensitivity after periodontal surgery

Materials and Methods: Twenty-two patients who, after full mouth periodontal surgery, had a complaint of dentin hypersensitivity [DH] in at least three quadrants were selected. Then a specific treatment was randomly selected for each quadrant which was applied once a day for one week and then stopped. A visual analog scale [VAS] was used to assess the subjects' responses to air blast and periodontal probe stimuli at baseline at one week, and one, three and 6 months after treatment. To analyze the data, repeated measures ANOVA test, Tukey test and variance analysis test were used

Results: At all given intervals, almost both sodium fluoride and sensikin gel significantly reduced the dental sensitivity caused by stimulants. There were no significant differences between sensikin gel and other two desensitizers in reducing the dentin hypersensitivity after 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months with respect to air blast stimuli. Sensikin gel was more efficient than Fluoride varnish in reducing the sensitivity caused by periodontal probe after 1 month

Conclusions: Sensikin gel, sodium fluoride gel and fluoride varnish can all be prescribed to reduce dental sensitivity in patients who have undergone periodontal treatments. In the case of severe sensitivity to mechanical stimulations, a treatment with a long-run effectiveness such as sensikin and/or sodium fluoride gel is preferred

Morphometric changes of the socket after site preservation using nanobone and collagen membrane or stypro versus extraction alone

The long-term success of a dental implant relies on implant osseointegration into native and viable bone, implant placement in an ideal position, and optimal hard and soft tissue contour. This requires the presence of sufficient alveolar bone volume, good alveolar ridge [Practically with no sign of atrophy] and good surgical technique. The aim of this randomized controlled clinical study was to evaluate morphometric changes after different alveolar ridge preservation procedures.In this study, 33 patients who had single-rooted premolar, which needed to be extracted, were recruited. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups and after tooth extraction the following treatments were administered: in group A: NanoBone and a collagen membrane; in group B: NanoBone and Stypro; and in group C: natural healing. The following clinical parameters were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after the extraction: buccolingual width, midbuccal height [with the use of a custom made stent] and width of keratinized gingiva. For data analysis, Paired t-test,one-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests were used.The average reduction in the buccolingual width, midbuccal height and keratinized gingiva was as follows: group A: 1.18 +/- 0.6, 0.64 +/- 0.92 and 3.45 +/- 1.75 mm; group B: 2.18 +/- 0.75, 0.73 +/- 0.78 and 4.73 +/- 0.9 mm; and group C: 1 +/- 0.89, 2.36 +/- 1.21 and 5 +/- 0.63 mm, respectively. Moreover, a significantly reduced resorption was found in both the buccolingual width and the width of keratinized gingiva in group A as compared to groups B and C [p<0.05].This study showed that the use of collagen membrane+Nano bone [group A] can significantly reduce the horizontal resorption of the alveolar ridge and keratinized tissue more effectively than stypro+Nano bone [group B] and blood clot alone and natural healing [group C]

[Mercury toxicity]

Mercury is a metal found in elemental, organic, and inorganic forms in the nature. This substance is present in the composition of earth crust, soil, air, and even in some tissues of plants and sea animals. Each year nearly 3400 tons of mercury compounds are released in the environment, which 95% settle in the soil, 3% in the oceans, and 2% in the atmosphere. Different industrial products like medicines, health products [soaps, creams, skin lightening creams], medical instruments [thermometer, sphygmomanometer], some substances in dentistry [amalgam], mirrors, and even some of toys contein mercury. All of these compounds may enter into the human body via skin, gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts and cause serious harms. They may cause different signs of toxicity, local and general signs and symptoms, and in some cases even they may end up to death. When mercury toxicity is suspected, in addition to primary evaluations, some special laboratory tests may be of a great help. In order to provide a treatment, the basic steps for all toxicities must be performed to prevent further serious damages, and of course the care giver has to pay attention to specific and non specific features of this toxicity