ABOUT INDEXING EDITORIAL BOARD ARCHIVES AUTHOR GUIDELINES SUBMIT PAPER NEWS, EVENTS AUTHOR'S PAGE CONTACT
Materiale Plastice
Cite as: Mater. Plast.
https://doi.org/10.37358/Mat.Plast.1964

OSIM Nr. R102356
ISSN Print 0025-5289
ISSN Online 2668-8220
Journal Metrics
* Impact factor 2019: 1.517
* 5-Year IF: 1.179
* CiteScore: 2.4
* H index: 22
Materiale Plastice - Latest Issue

Latest Issue >>>
ARCHIVES
   Volume 58, 2021
   Volume 57, 2020
   Volume 56, 2019
   Volume 55, 2018
   Volume 54, 2017
   Volume 53, 2016
   Volume 52, 2015
   Volume 51, 2014
   Volume 50, 2013
   Volume 49, 2012
   Volume 48, 2011
   Volume 47, 2010
   Volume 46, 2009
   Volume 45, 2008
   Volume 44, 2007
   Volume 43, 2006
   Volume 42, 2005
   Volume 41, 2004
   Volume 40, 2003
 
<<<< back

Materiale Plastice (Mater. Plast.), Year 2016, Volume 53, Issue 4, 661-665



Anamaria Bechir, Edwin Sever Bechir, Roxana Manu, Alexandru Burcea, Cherana Gioga, Horia Mihail Barbu, Carmen Biris, Gabriela Ciavoi, Ionela Teodora Dascalu

Comparative Effectiveness of Two Desensitizing Products in Dental Cervical Erosions


Abstract:
The aim of this clinical study was to investigate the comparative effectiveness of two dental desensitisers based on 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (Gluma desensitizer and Shield activ desensitizer), in decreasing the dentinal painful sensitivity caused by cervical erosions.The clinical trial consisted of 63 patients (323 teeth), with minimum three teeth which presented cervical erosion with dentinal hypersensitivity. The sensitive teeth were treated with Gluma Desensitizer-Heraeus Kulzer (first batch of teeth), Shield activ desensitiser (second batch) and distilled water (third batch of teeth=control group). We effectuated in total three desensitisation sessions, at 5 days difference. The level of cervical dentinal hypersensitivity (CDH) was determined in six sessions, after the patient’s response to air-blast stimuli. We used the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to assess the CDH. The results proved the effectiveness of used desensitizing agents in treating CDH in the first and the second batch of teeth, in comparison with the control group teeth. We noticed that after the second application of Gluma and Shield products significant differences, in comparison with the baseline, appeared. After 3 month follow-up, we ascertained that both products induced the decreasing of CDH. No significant differences were recorded between the two products. A placebo effect in reduction of CDH was observed in the group of teeth treated with distilled water. Both dentin desensitizing agents have proven effective in reducing CDH.


Keywords:
cervical erosion; dentin hypersensitivity; Gluma desensitiser; Shield activ desensitiser

Issue: 2016 Volume 53, Issue 4
Pages: 661-665
Publication date: 2016/12/30
download pdf   Download Pdf Article
Creative Commons License
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<<<< back
 
  Search Authors
Crossref Member Badge
 DOI  logo
 Gold Open Access | Source=http://www.plos.org/  | Author=art designer at PLoS
Creative Commons License