PradeepKumar Angambakkam Rajasekaran, Viswanath Venkatnagaraj, Singh Kamna, Manigandan Kuzhanchinathan, Iqbal HaseenaBegum, Kishen Anil
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Thai Moogambigai Dental College and Hospital, Dr. MGR Educational and Research Institute (Deemed to be University), Toronto, Canada.
Dental Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, 124 Edward Street, Toronto, Canada.
J Conserv Dent. 2019 Nov-Dec;22(6):522-528. doi: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_22_20. Epub 2020 Aug 20.
Clinical research is important to evaluate the effect of desensitizing agents.
This randomized clinical trial evaluated the immediate and 1 week desensitizing effect of two desensitizing agents Uno Topical Gel and Profluorid.
Thirtyfive patients with teeth presenting with dentin hypersensitivity were included in this clinical trial. Each quadrant in a patient was randomly assigned to one of two groups: Uno Topical Gel or Profluorid Varnish. A VAS score was used to assess tooth sensitivity at baseline, immediately after application of desensitizer and after 1 week. Additionally, 30 dentin discs were prepared, divided into Group 1(Control Group), Group 2 (Profluorid Varnish) and Group 3 (Uno Topical Gel) and examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) after 1hour and 24 hours to evaluate tubule occlusion.
Clinical data were analysed using Friedman's test and Mann - Whitney U test. SEM data was analysed using Student's 2-sample -test.
Uno group was significantly better to evaporative stimuli immediately (=0.01) after application. After 1 week, Uno group was significantly better to tactile (=0.000) and evaporative (=0.000) stimuli than Profluorid. SEM images showed that 1 hour after application, Uno and Profluorid demonstrated more than 90% and 80% dentin tubule occlusion respectively. At 24 hours, Uno and Profluorid demonstrated more than 50% and 60% dentin tubule occlusion respectively.
Uno Topical Gel was significantly better than Profluorid in reducing pain of dentin hypersensitivity due to tactile and evaporative stimuli after 1 week.
临床研究对于评估脱敏剂的效果很重要。
本随机临床试验评估了两种脱敏剂Uno局部凝胶和含氟涂料的即刻及1周脱敏效果。
本临床试验纳入了35例患有牙本质过敏的患者。将患者的每个象限随机分为两组之一：Uno局部凝胶组或含氟涂料组。采用视觉模拟评分法（VAS）在基线、应用脱敏剂后即刻及1周后评估牙齿敏感性。此外，制备30个牙本质圆盘，分为第1组（对照组）、第2组（含氟涂料组）和第3组（Uno局部凝胶组），在1小时和24小时后使用扫描电子显微镜（SEM）检查以评估小管阻塞情况。
临床数据采用Friedman检验和Mann - Whitney U检验进行分析。SEM数据采用学生双样本检验进行分析。
应用后即刻，Uno组对蒸发刺激的效果显著更好（P = 0.01）。1周后，Uno组对触觉（P = 0.000）和蒸发（P = 0.000）刺激的效果显著优于含氟涂料组。SEM图像显示，应用后1小时，Uno和含氟涂料分别使牙本质小管阻塞率超过90%和80%。在24小时时，Uno和含氟涂料分别使牙本质小管阻塞率超过50%和60%。
1周后，Uno局部凝胶在减轻因触觉和蒸发刺激引起的牙本质过敏疼痛方面显著优于含氟涂料。
