 |
| Dentinal hypersensitivity: |
 |
DH pain is sudden, brief, and severe, triggered by thermal, osmotic, chemical, or mechanical stimuli. |
|
Younger adults tend to experience DH due to erosions and exposed dentin, while older patients experience DH due to exposed root surfaces from periodontal disease. |
|
|
|
|
| Treatment of Dentin Hypersensitivity (DH): |
|
Nerve Desensitization: Potassium salts (e.g., potassium nitrate) are used to depolarize nerve terminals, preventing pain transmission and reducing pain perception. |
|
Photobiomodulation: |
| |
| - |
Low-Intensity Lasers (e.g., gallium aluminum arsenide laser (GaAlAs) or helium–neon laser (HeNe) disrupts the Na+/Ca2+ exchanger, reducing pain transmission. |
| - |
High-Intensity Lasers (e.g., neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser (Nd:YAG), erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet laser (Er: YAG), erbium, chromium: yttrium, scandium, gallium, garnet laser (Er, Cr: YSGG) and CO2) obliterate dentinal tubules, inducing secondary and tertiary dentin formation via odontoblasts to seal the tubules. |
|
|
|
Physical Occlusion of Dentinal Tubules: |
| |
| - |
Occlusion Agents: Fluorides, oxalates, arginine, adhesives, hydroxyapatite, and bioactive glass (BAG) are used to physically block dentinal tubules. |
| - |
Bioactive Glass (BAG): Forms a hydroxyapatite (HAP) layer by reacting with collagen fibers and resisting acidic environments, effectively sealing dentinal tubules. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Bioactive Glass (BAG): |
|
Mechanism of Bioactive Glass (BAG): |
| |
| - |
BAG forms a negative surface charge, binding to collagen fibers in exposed dentin and leading to HAP formation. |
| - |
The process involves ion exchange with surrounding body fluid, forming amorphous calcium phosphate, which crystallizes into HAP, occluding the tubules. |
|
|
|
Effectiveness of Bioactive Glass: |
| |
| - |
Bioactive glass materials, specifically calcium sodium phosphosilicate (CSPS) and fluoro calcium phosphosilicate (FCPS), are effective in reducing dentin hypersensitivity (DH) in adult participants. |
|
|
|
Comparison of Treatments: |
| |
| - |
CSPS was not significantly different from certain positive control groups (15% nano HAP, 10% nano-HAPKN (nano-HAP supplemented with potassium nitrate), Nd:YAG laser, fluorinol toothpaste) |
| - |
Compared to 10% nano-HAP, CSPS reduced DH significantly more at six and eight weeks. |
| - |
Pro-argin® and strontium acetate are efficacious in relieving DH pain in the short term, but FCPS may be the best long-term treatment option after 1 month when visual analogue scale (VAS) scores in the FCPS group were found to be significantly better when compared to the ProArgin® and placebo toothpastes in the treatment of DH. |
| - |
According to Ashwini et al., the FCPS group was more effective than the CSPS and standard fluoride dentifrices in reducing DH symptoms. |
|
|
|
Concentration Matters: |
| |
| - |
CSPS at concentrations of 5–15% and FCPS at a concentration of 5% were effective in treating DH. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| GGI-CO-A1-AQS-300032384-DVC-L24-0140 |
| References: |
| 1. |
Petrović D, Galić D, Seifert D, Lešić N, Smolić M. Evaluation of Bioactive Glass Treatment for Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Systematic Review. Biomedicines. 2023;11(7):1992. Published 2023 Jul 14. doi:10.3390/biomedicines11071992 |
|
|
|
|
