Comparing the effect of a desensitizing material and a self-etch adhesive on dentin sensitivity after periodontal surgery: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES: This double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluated the ability of a desensitizing agent and a self-etch adhesive on cervical dentin sensitivity (CDS) after periodontal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety hypersensitive teeth of 13 subjects were included in the study. After periodontal surgery, the teeth of each posterior sextant treated with one of the following materials: G1: Clearfil S³ Bond (Kuraray Dental), G2: Gluma Desensitizer (Heraeus Kulzer), and G3: placebo (water). The sensitivity was assessed using evaporative stimuli before treatment (baseline, T0), 1 day after treatment (T1), after 1 week (T2), and after 1 month (T3) according to visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Following the treatment, all the 3 groups showed significant reduction of CDS in T1 compared to T0. Reduction of CDS between T1 and T2 was observed only in G1 but there was no significant difference between T2 and T3 in this group. Although we observed a significant difference in T3 compared to T1 and T2 in G2 and G3, comparison of treatment groups in each assessment time showed a significant difference only in T3. According to paired comparison, this was due to the difference between G2 and G3. CONCLUSIONS: Dentin sensitivity following periodontal surgery will decrease spontaneously over time, but treating the sensitive teeth with Gluma Desensitizer and Clearfil S³ Bond can have some benefits.

Effect of GLUMA desensitizer on the retention of full metal crowns cemented with Rely X U200 self-adhesive cement

PURPOSE: Considering the importance of retention in the success and long-term clinical service of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) as well as the existing controversy regarding the effect of GLUMA desensitizer on the retention of full metal crowns cemented with RelyX U200 self-adhesive cement, this study aimed to assess the effect of GLUMA desensitizer on the retention of full metal crowns cemented using RelyX U200. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental study, 20 sound human premolars were prepared; a 0.5 mm chamfer finish line was prepared above the cementoenamel junction. The teeth were randomly assigned to two groups: a desensitizer group (n = 10, treated with GLUMA desensitizer) and a control (n = 10, no surface treatment). Full metal crowns were fabricated of base metal alloy and had a ring. All crowns were cemented with RelyX U200 and subjected to retention test by using a universal testing machine. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 20 and independent t-test. RESULTS: The mean tensile bond strength was significantly higher in the GLUMA desensitizer group (230.63 ± 63.8 N) compared to the control group (164.45 ± 39.3 N) (P≤.012). CONCLUSION: GLUMA desensitizer increases the tensile bond strength of RelyX U200 self-adhesive cement to dentin.

Evaluation of three different agents for in‑office treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: A controlled clinical study.

Context: Dentin desensitizers are used for in‑office treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. They block the open tubules and bring about a reduction in hypersensitivity. Aim: The aim was to evaluate and compare the clinical effectiveness of a dentin desensitizer, a combination of a dentin desensitizer + adhesive and one‑bottle self‑etching adhesive for in‑office treatment of dentin hypersensitivity. Settings and Design: Institutional, prospective double-blind parallel clinical design. Subjects and Methods: A total of 54 teeth in 20 patients were randomly allocated to one of the three study groups, with 18 teeth in each group as follows: Group A‑Gluma Desensitizer (GD), Group B‑Gluma Comfort Bond + Desensitizer (GCBD), Group C‑Single Bond Universal (SBU). The patients’ dentinal hypersensitivity scores for tactile (hand‑held scratch device), thermal (cold), and evaporative (dental unit air syringe) stimuli were recorded on a visual analog scale. The parameters were recorded at baseline, immediately after application of the agent, 3‑ and 6‑week posttreatment. Statistical Analysis Used: The data were analyzed with Friedman’s test, Wilcoxon signed ranks test, Kruskal–Wallis test, and Mann–Whitney‑U‑test (P < 0.05). Results: All three groups showed a significant reduction in dentinal hypersensitivity (P < 0.05) compared to baseline at all time intervals. Statistically, significant differences were noted between GD and SBU; between GCBD and SBU in all testing parameters. Between GD and GCBD no significant difference was noted. Conclusions: GD and GCBD showed a greater reduction in dentin hypersensitivity than SBU.

The effect of 3 MP90 bonding system in dentin tubule sealing / 实用口腔医学杂志

Dentin blocks were prepared from 36 freshly extracted teeth and randomly divided into 3 groups(n=1 2).The block surfaces were cleaned and then treated with 3 MP90 bonding system,Gluma desensitizer and distilled water respectively.Scanning electron microsco-py observation showed that the dentin tubule sealing rate of 3 MP90 bonding system,Gluma desensitizer and distilled water was 1 00%, 76.48% and 0(P<0.05)respectively.

The effects of desensitizing agents, bonding resin and tooth brushing on dentin permeability, in vitro / 대한치과보철학회지

PURPOSE: The effects of desensitizing agent are often for a short duration. One of the reasons is believed to be wear of desensitizing agent by tooth brushing. To reduce the wear and make the duration longer, dental bonding resin was applied and the changes of dentin permeability after toothbrushing were measured. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Extracted teeth free from caries were chosen. Coronal dentin discs with thickness of 1 mm were prepared. Using the split chamber device developed by Pashely, hydraulic conductance and scanning electron microscope images (SEM) were compared and contrasted before and immediately after the application of desensitizing agent and bonding resin and then after equivalent tooth brushing of 1 week, 2 weeks, and 6 weeks. Four commercially available desensitizing agents were used in this study; they were All-Bond 2, Seal & Protect, Gluma, and MS Coat. And Dentin/Enamel Bonding resin (Bisco Inc.) was used. The results of this study are as follows. RESULTS: On all specimens, the hydraulic conductance decreased after the application of tooth desensitizing agent and bonding resin. Compared with the specimens treated only with desensitizer, the specimens treated with All-Bond 2, Gluma, MS Coat and plus D/E bonding resin had a little increase in hydraulic conductance after 1, 2 and 6-week tooth brushing. In case of Seal & Protect, the specimens showed the same result only after 6-week tooth brushing. On examination of SEM, the dentinal tubule diameter had decreased after treatment of desensitizing agents and bonding resin. And the specimens treated with All-Bond2, Seal&Protect, Gluma, MS Coat and plus D/E bonding resin had an significant decrease in diameter of dentinal tubule after 6-week tooth brushing. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study, it is effective to use bonding resin after application of desensitizer in reducing the wear by tooth brushing and making the duration longer. In this study, just 6-week tooth brushing was performed, and it is not enough to regard it as a long-term data. So further study is needed and more perfect method for treating dentin hypersensitivity should be developed.

Comparative evaluation of NovaMin desensitizer and Gluma desensitizer on dentinal tubule occlusion: a scanning electron microscopic study

PURPOSE: In this study, the effect of calcium sodium phosphosilicate (NovaMin) desensitizing agent, which is a powder-based system, and hydroxyethyl methacrylate and glutaraldehyde (Gluma desensitizer), which is liquid-based system, on dentinal tubule occlusion was analyzed by scanning electron microscope. The effects of the above two along with one control group were compared to determine the more effective method of sealing the dentinal tubules after initial application. METHODS: Twenty specimens were allocated to each of 3 groups: Control, Gluma desensitizer, and NovaMin. Two additional samples were also prepared and treated with Gluma and NovaMin; these samples were longitudinally fractured. The specimens were prepared from extracted sound human premolars and were stored in 10% formalin at room temperature. The teeth were cleaned of gross debris and then sectioned to provide one to two dentin specimens. The dentin specimens were etched with 6% citric acid for 2 minutes and rinsed in distilled water. Control discs were dried, and the test discs were treated with the desensitizing agents as per the manufacturer's instructions. The discs as well as longitudinal sections were later analyzed under the scanning electron microscope. The proportions of completely occluded, partially occluded, and open tubules within each group were calculated. The ratios of completely and partially occluded tubules to the total tubules for all the groups was determined, and the data was statistically analyzed using nonparametric tests and statistical significance was calculated. RESULTS: NovaMin showed more completely occluded tubules (0.545+/-0.051) while Gluma desensitizer showed more partially occluded tubules (0.532+/-0.075). The differences among all the groups were statistically significant (P< or = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both materials were effective in occluding dentinal tubules but NovaMin appeared more promising in occluding tubules completely after initial application.

In vitro dentin permeability after application of Gluma® desensitizer as aqueous solution or aqueous fumed silica dispersion

OBJECTIVES: To assess and to compare the effects of Gluma® Desensitizer (GDL) with an experimental glutaraldehyde and HEMA containing fumed silica dispersion (GDG) on dentin permeability using a chemiluminous tracer penetration test. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty disc-shaped dentin specimens were dissected from extracted human third molars. The dentin specimens were mounted in a split chamber device for determination of permeability under liquid pressure using a photochemical method. Ten specimens were randomly selected and allocated to the evaluation groups Gluma® Desensitizer as aqueous solution and glutaraldehyde/HEMA as fumed silica dispersion, respectively. Dentin disc permeability was determined at two pressure levels after removal of smear with EDTA, after albumin soaking, and after application of the desensitizing agents. Two desensitizer-treated and rinsed specimens of each group were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for surface remnants. RESULTS: Comparatively large standard deviations of the mean EDTA reference and albumin soaked samples permeability values refected the differences of the dentin substrates. The mean chemiluminescence values of specimen treated with GDL and GDG, respectively, were signifcantly reduced after topical application of the desensitizing agents on albumin-soaked dentin. The effects of GDL and GDG on permeability were not signifcantly different. Treated specimens showed no surface remnants after rinsing. CONCLUSIONS: The experimental desensitizer gel formulation reduced dentin permeability as effectively as the original Gluma® Desensitizer solution.

Effect of rewetting agent on dentinal microtensile bond strength / 대한치과보존학회지

This study investigated that the effect of rewetting agent on dentinal microtensile bond strength (microTBS). Human molars were sectioned to expose the superficial dentin surfaces. Samples were divided into two groups according to type of adhesives-Single Bond (S) and One-Step (O)], and again subdivided into five groups by different dentin surface treatment-dry for 15s (D), blot dry (BD) or dry for 15s, and rewet with different rewetting agents [distilled water (DW), Gluma Desensitizer (GD) and Aqua-Prep (AP)] for 30s. After application of adhesive, composite resin was built up on the bonding surface. Each tooth was sectioned to obtain stick with 1 mm2 cross sectional area and the microTBS was determined by EZ test. In the S group, the mean microTBS of GD, AP and BD group was significantly higher than that of DW and D group (p < 0.05). In the O group, the mean microTBS of AP, GD, BD and DW group was significantly higher than that of D group (p < 0.05). The data suggested that Gluma Desensitizer and Aqua-Prep could be successfully used as rewetting agents, and Distilled water could be acceptable in aceton based adhesive system only.

Observation of clinical effects of three kinds of desensitizer on dentin hypersensitivity / 重庆医科大学学报

Objective:To eveluate the clinical effects of treating dentine hypersensitivity with three kinds of desensitizer(Prime & Bond NT,GLUMA desensitizer and 75% sodium fluoride glycerin).Methods:324 teeth with dentin hypersensitivity were divided into three groups.Group A:Prime & Bond NT adhesive.Group B:GLUMA desensitizer.Group C:sodium fluoride.Results:Instant,effective rates in group A and group B were significantly higher than that in group C(P0.05).After three months,effective rates in group A was significantly higher than that in group B(P