International Journal of Experimental Dental Science

Register      Login

VOLUME 5 , ISSUE 1 ( January-June, 2016 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Two New Commercially Available Desensitizing Agents: An in vivo Study

Sohani Maroli

Citation Information : Maroli S. Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Two New Commercially Available Desensitizing Agents: An in vivo Study. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2016; 5 (1):40-44.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10029-1121

Published Online: 01-06-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Objective

To compare the clinical efficacy of two commercially available desensitizing agents, Fluorprotector vivampuole and GLUMA comfort bond plus desensitizer in the treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity.

Materials and methods

A total of 203 teeth were selected for study. Patients who presented with a history of sensitivity to hot/cold, sweet, and sour food were examined using light tactile response along the cervical margin of the teeth. The assessment methods used to quantify sensitivity were tactile test, air blast test, and cold water test. The subjects were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1: GLUMA comfort bond plus desensitizer; group 2: Fluorprotector vivampuole (newly introduced by Ivoclar). The patients were evaluated for sensitivity at five appointments: at baseline, immediately after application of the agent, 1 day after application, after 1 week, and after 1 month.

Results

Patients belonging to group 2 showed significantly better results compared with patients of group 1 at 4 weeks.

Conclusion

Both the desensitizing agents showed significant reduction in sensitivity at all time intervals compared with baseline. However, Fluorprotector vivampuole appeared to be more effective in providing long-term relief against all the three test stimuli.

Clinical Significance

Fluorprotector vivampuole is a newly introduced fluoride varnish which is clear and colorless. It can be used in cases of dentinal hypersensitivity without affecting the aesthetics of the patient, particularly in case of anterior teeth.

How to cite this article

Maroli S. Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Two New Commercially Available Desensitizing Agents: An in vivo Study. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2016;5(1):40-44.


PDF Share
  1. Dentin hypersensitivity: recent trends in management. J Conserv Dent 2010 Oct-Dec;13(4):218-224.
  2. Dentinehypersensitivity— an enigma? A review of terminology, mechanisms, aetiology and management. Br Dent J 1999 Dec11;187(11):606-611.
  3. Effects of glutaraldehyde, HEMA and gluma desensitizer on in vitro dentin permeability. Int J Contemp Dent 2011 Jan;2(1):3-8.
  4. Fluorine therapy for exposed dentin and alveolar atrophy. J Dent Res 1941 Dec;20:649.
  5. Treating cervical dentin hypersensitivity with fluoride varnish—a randomized clinical study. J Am Dent Assoc 2006 Jul;137(7):1013-1020.
  6. Comparative evaluation of two commercially available desensitizing agents for the treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. Ind J Dent Res 2012 Nov-Dec;23(6):778-783.
  7. An evaluation of two methods for the quantitation of dentinal hypersensitivity. J Am Dent Assoc 1979 Jun;98(6):914-918.
  8. Dentinal hypersensitivity and its management—an informed view. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2013 Feb;27(27):474-479.
  9. Available at: http://heraeuskulzer-us.com/media/webmedia_local/media/msds//
  10. A clinical comparison of in-office management of dentin hypersensitivity in a short term treatment period. Int J Biomed Adv Res 2012 May;3(3):169-174.
  11. Available at: http://www.ivoclarvivadent.us/en-us/products/prevention-care/fluoridation/fluor-protector.
  12. Penetration of varnishes into demineralised root dentine in vitro. Caries Res 1997;31(3): 201-205.
  13. Ozone therapy in dentistry: a strategic review. J Nat Sc Biol Med 2011;2:151-153.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.