elgohary, S. (2024). THE EFFECT OF A RESIN-BASED DESENSITIZER CONTAINING GLUTARALDEHYDE ON CERVICAL DENTIN HYPERSENSITIVITY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL. Alexandria Dental Journal, 49(3), 119-127. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2023.214772.1383
sahar ahmed elgohary. "THE EFFECT OF A RESIN-BASED DESENSITIZER CONTAINING GLUTARALDEHYDE ON CERVICAL DENTIN HYPERSENSITIVITY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL". Alexandria Dental Journal, 49, 3, 2024, 119-127. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2023.214772.1383
elgohary, S. (2024). 'THE EFFECT OF A RESIN-BASED DESENSITIZER CONTAINING GLUTARALDEHYDE ON CERVICAL DENTIN HYPERSENSITIVITY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL', Alexandria Dental Journal, 49(3), pp. 119-127. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2023.214772.1383
elgohary, S. THE EFFECT OF A RESIN-BASED DESENSITIZER CONTAINING GLUTARALDEHYDE ON CERVICAL DENTIN HYPERSENSITIVITY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL. Alexandria Dental Journal, 2024; 49(3): 119-127. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2023.214772.1383
THE EFFECT OF A RESIN-BASED DESENSITIZER CONTAINING GLUTARALDEHYDE ON CERVICAL DENTIN HYPERSENSITIVITY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL
Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
Abstract
Introduction: Non-carious enamel loss is becoming more prevalent due to modern habits which lead to increased levels of dentinal hypersensitivity (DH). DH manifests through dental abrasion, erosion, etc. When dentin is exposed, external stimuli can cause excessive pulpal pain response. Dental adhesives/restorations and desensitizers have been developed for obliteration of dentinal tubules (DTs) and treatment of DH. Objectives: To clinically evaluate the effectiveness of a glutaraldehyde-based desensitizer (Gluma™ Desensitizer Heraus-Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) vs conventional universal bonding agent (Scotchbond™ Universal Adhesive) in minimizing cervical dentin hypersensitivity (CDH) throughout a 6-months follow-up period. Material and methods: 14 patients having a minimum of two contralateral teeth with CDH were allocated for a split-mouth, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Each Patient received Gluma™ Desensitizer on one side vs Scotchbond™ Universal Adhesive on the other side. A total of three desensitization sessions were performed at 5 days interval. For assessment of hypersensitivity levels, air-blast and tactile Visual Analog Scale (VAS) sensitivity scores were evaluated at baseline (T0), immediately after each desensitizing session (T1,T2,T3), and at the 1st (T4), 3rd (T5), 6th (T6) months of follow-up. Results: Both agents reduced CDH significantly over the course of the study. At T6, mean air-blast sensitivity VAS scores demonstrated statistically nonsignificant difference between groups (p=0.493). Probe sensitivity VAS scores recorded significant statistical difference between groups. Conclusions: Gluma desensitizer and Scotchbond Universal Adhesive resulted equally in a reduction of pain intensity for patients with DH. No advantage was detected for the use of one material over the other.
View on SCiNiTO
Top