The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of four in-office desensitizing products on dentin tubule occlusion and erosive wear.
Dentin hypersensitivity was simulated by EDTA application for five minutes. The specimens were randomly allocated into five groups (n=11), according to treatment: No treatment - Control (C), Duraphat (DUR), Desensibilize Nano P (NP), ClinPro XT Varnish (XTV), and ClinPro White Varnish (CWV). They were then submitted to erosive/abrasive cycling for five days. After EDTA, treatment, and cycling, the specimens were analyzed with an environmental scanning electron microscope (ESEM) to verify the number of opened dentin tubules (ODT) which were counted by using ImageJ software, and with a profilometer to determine the surface curvature/loss. ESEM data were analyzed with two-way repeated measure analysis of variance and Tukey tests. For the profilometer, data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis, Tukey, and Mann-Whitney tests.
After treatment, all groups showed lower ODT than the control, without significant differences between them. After cycling, the only group that showed lower ODT than the control was group XTV; however, it did not significantly differ from the other groups. For the profilometric analysis, there were significant differences in SL between the experimental times after treatment and after cycling for all groups ( p<0.05). After cycling, no surface loss was detected in groups DUR and XTV, which presented a significantly different curvature than group NP and the control group, but not from group CWV. Surface loss was detected for the control and groups NP and CWV, without difference among them.
All desensitizing agents tested presented promising results concerning the obliteration of dentin tubules immediately after treatment. XTV was the only desensitizer capable of preventing the reopening of the tubules after the erosive/abrasive challenges. XTV and DUR presented a protective effect against dentin erosive wear.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Operative Dentistry
#738
of 847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,865
of 342,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Operative Dentistry
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 847 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
