Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics

OPEN ACCESS

Search

Page Path
HOME > Search
4 "Desensitizer"
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Research Article
Comparing the effect of a desensitizing material and a self-etch adhesive on dentin sensitivity after periodontal surgery: a randomized clinical trial
Hila Hajizadeh, Atefeh Nemati-Karimooy, Sara Majidinia, Amir Moeintaghavi, Marjaneh Ghavamnasiri
Restor Dent Endod 2017;42(3):168-175.   Published online July 21, 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.3.168
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
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.

  • 28 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer
Original Articles
Effect of a desensitizer on dentinal bond strength in cementation of composite resin inlay
Sae-Hee Han, Young-Gon Cho
J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2009;34(3):223-231.   Published online May 31, 2009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2009.34.3.223
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a desensitizer on dentinal bond strength in cementation of composite resin inlay. Fifty four molar teeth were exposed the occlusal dentin. Class I inlay cavities were prepared and randomly divided into six groups. Control group ; no agent, Group 1 ; Isodan, Group 2 ; One-step, Group 3 ; All-Bond SE, Group 4 ; Isodan + One-step, Group 5 ; Isodan + All-Bond SE.

Desensitizing agent and dentin bonding agents were applied immediately after the completion of the preparations. Impressions were then made. The composite resin inlays (Tescera, Bisco) were fabricated according to the manufacturers' guidelines. Cementation procedures followed a standard protocol by using resin cement (Bis-Cem, Bisco). Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37℃ for 24 hours.

All specimens were sectioned to obtained sticks with 1.0 × 1.0 mm2 cross sectional area. The microtensile bond strength (µTBS) was tested at crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. The data was analyzed using oneway ANOVA and Tukey's test. Scanning electron microscopy analysis was made to examine the details of the bonding interface.

1. Group 1 showed significantly lower µTBS than other groups (p<0.05).

2. There was no significant difference between the µTBS of Group 3 and Group 5.

3. The µTBS of Group 4 showed significantly lower than that of Group 2 (p<0.05).

In conclusion, a desensitizer (Isodan) might have an adverse effect on the bond strength of composite resin inlay to dentin.

  • 28 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer
Effect of rewetting agent on dentinal microtensile bond strength
Hee-Young Kang, Young-Gon Cho, Jong-Uk Kim, Byung-Cheul Park, Sang-Hoon Yoo, Cheul-Hee Jin, Hee-Young Choi, Young-Jae Ki
J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2004;29(2):153-161.   Published online March 31, 2004
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.2.153
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub

This study investigated that the effect of rewetting agent on dentinal microtensile bond strength (µTBS). 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 µTBS was determined by EZ test.

In the S group, the mean µTBS 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 µTBS 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.

  • 17 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer
Effect of a desensitizer on microtensile bond strength of different adhesives
Sung-Yeon Hwang, Kyung-Ha Lee, Mi-Kyung Yu, Kwang-Won Lee
J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2003;28(5):378-384.   Published online September 30, 2003
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2003.28.5.378
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub

This study evaluated the influence of a desensitizer(MS coat) on microtensile bond strength of different adhesives: a three-step adhesive(All-Bond 2), a two-step adhesive(Single Bond), a one-step adhesive(One-up Bond F).

Non-caries extracted human molars were used. Dentin surface was obtained by horizontal section on midportion of crown using a water-cooled low speed diamond saw. Teeth were randomly divided into 6 group. AMO(MS coat + All Bond)-, SMO(MS coat + Single Bond)- and OMO(MS coat + One-up Bond F)-dentin surface were treated with 17% EDTA before bonded adhesive. AMX-, SMX- and OMX-dentin surface were bonded with All-Bond 2, Single Bond and One-up Bond F, respectively, with no previous treatment with MS coat and 17% EDTA. About 1cm high resin composite(Z-250™) were incrementally build-up on the treated surface. The specimens for the microtensile test were serially sectioned perpendicular to the adhesive layer to obtain 0.7×0.7 mm sticks. 30 sticks were prepared from each group.

After that, tensile bond strength for each stick was measured with Microtensile Tester at a 1mm/min crosshead speed. Fractured dentin surfaces were observed under the SEM. The results were statistically analysed by using a One-way ANOVA and Tukey's test(p<0.05).

Value in MPa were: AMO-44.35±13.21; SMO-39.35±13.32; OMO-31.07±10.25; AMX-49.22±16.38; SMX-56.02±13.35; OMX-72.93±16.19. Application of MS coat reduced microtensile bond strengths of both Single Bond and One-up Bond F, whereas microtensile bond strengths of All-Bond 2 were not affected significantly.

  • 17 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics
Close layer
TOP