Suppr超能文献

二极管激光和 Gluma 对预备后敏感的疗效:一项随机分组对照临床研究。

Efficacy of Diode Laser and Gluma on Post-Preparation Sensitivity: A Randomized Split-Mouth Clinical Study.

机构信息

Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Research Assistant, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

J Esthet Restor Dent. 2016 Nov 12;28(6):405-411. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12230. Epub 2016 Jul 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a 940-nm diode laser and Gluma desensitizer on post-preparation sensitivity of prepared teeth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients with 76 teeth participated in the study. For each patient, prepared molar or premolar in one quadrant were individually irradiated by laser. In the symmetrical quadrant, Gluma was applied onto the prepared teeth. No treatment was performed in the control group. Temporary crowns were placed after preparation. Pain response to tactile stimulus was assessed at one day, one week, and two weeks using visual analog scale (VAS). Intergroup comparisons were made with Kruskal Wallis test (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Mean VAS scores of the control group were statistically higher than laser and Gluma groups (p < 0.017). The difference between VAS scores of the laser and Gluma groups was statistically insignificant (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant reduction in level of sensitivity after both treatments was observed. The reduction of sensitivity with Gluma was not significantly superior to laser. No significant additional reduction occurred in level of sensitivity from the first day to the second week after both treatments.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The application of Gluma or a 940-nm diode laser may be considered as effective in reducing sensitivity after tooth preparation without superiority of either method. (J Esthet Restor Dent 28:405-411, 2016).

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较 940nm 半导体激光和 Gluma 脱敏剂对预备后牙齿敏感的疗效。

材料与方法

20 名患者共 76 颗牙参与了这项研究。对于每一位患者,在一侧象限中每颗预备的磨牙或前磨牙都单独用激光照射。在对侧象限中,将 Gluma 应用于预备的牙齿。对照组不进行任何治疗。预备后放置临时冠。使用视觉模拟评分(VAS)在第 1 天、第 1 周和第 2 周评估对触诊刺激的疼痛反应。使用 Kruskal Wallis 检验进行组间比较(p<0.05)。

结果

对照组的平均 VAS 评分明显高于激光组和 Gluma 组(p<0.017)。激光组和 Gluma 组的 VAS 评分差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。

结论

两种治疗后均观察到敏感性显著降低。Gluma 降低敏感性的效果并不明显优于激光。两种治疗后从第 1 天到第 2 周,敏感性水平没有明显进一步降低。

临床意义

应用 Gluma 或 940nm 半导体激光可有效降低牙体预备后的敏感性,两种方法均无明显优势。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验