• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.48 no.6
• /
• pp.469-477
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of two dentin desensitizers and Er,Cr:YSGG laser for dentinal tubule occlusion. Twenty recently extracted single-rooted human teeth were used to obtain root dentinal fragments. The crowns were cut approximately 1mm below the cementum enamel junction(CEJ). A second cut was used to remove the apex of the root. Subsequently, a longitudinal cut was made in order to obtain 2 fragments from each root sample. The cementum from the cervical portion was removed using a high-speed diamond-coated bur in order to expose the dentin. To open dentinal tubules, forty samples were treated with 50% citric acid for 2 min and then rinsed under distilled water for 1 min. These were divided into four groups of ten samples each. The first group served as a control group. In group 2, the samples were irradiated with the Er,Cr:YSGG laser(Waterlase MD, Biolase, USA). In group 3, the samples were treated with Bisblock and ONE-STEP PLUS(Bisco, USA). In group 4, the samples were treated with Gluma comfort bond & Desensitizer(Heraeus Kulzer, Germany). All the samples were examined using Scanning electron microscopy(Hitachi, S-4700, Japan) with two different magnifications(X2000, X5000). These images were assessed by one examiner who was blind to the experimental procedure, using the index of smear layer removal. The distribution of smear layer removal grades was tested using Fisher's exact test. On the order hand, in order to evaluate the occluding effect of two dentin desensitizers and Er,Cr:YSGG laser, the number of exposed dentinal tubules was counted in each group. These were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis test with significance predetermined $\alpha$=0.05. There were statistically significant differences between the three groups(Er,Cr:YSGG laser, Bisblock+ONE-STEP PLUS, Gluma comfort bond & Desensitizer) and control group.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.165-176
• /
• 2014

Purpose: The effects of desensitizing agent are often for a short duration. One of the reasons is believed to be wear of desensitizing agent by tooth brushing. To reduce the wear and make the duration longer, dental bonding resin was applied and the changes of dentin permeability after toothbrushing were measured. Materials and methods: Extracted teeth free from caries were chosen. Coronal dentin discs with thickness of 1 mm were prepared. Using the split chamber device developed by Pashely, hydraulic conductance and scanning electron microscope images (SEM) were compared and contrasted before and immediately after the application of desensitizing agent and bonding resin and then after equivalent tooth brushing of 1 week, 2 weeks, and 6 weeks. Four commercially available desensitizing agents were used in this study; they were All-Bond 2, Seal & Protect, Gluma, and MS Coat. And Dentin/Enamel Bonding resin (Bisco Inc.) was used. The results of this study are as follows. Results: On all specimens, the hydraulic conductance decreased after the application of tooth desensitizing agent and bonding resin. Compared with the specimens treated only with desensitizer, the specimens treated with All-Bond 2, Gluma, MS Coat and plus D/E bonding resin had a little increase in hydraulic conductance after 1, 2 and 6-week tooth brushing. In case of Seal & Protect, the specimens showed the same result only after 6-week tooth brushing. On examination of SEM, the dentinal tubule diameter had decreased after treatment of desensitizing agents and bonding resin. And the specimens treated with All-Bond2, Seal&Protect, Gluma, MS Coat and plus D/E bonding resin had an significant decrease in diameter of dentinal tubule after 6-week tooth brushing. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, it is effective to use bonding resin after application of desensitizer in reducing the wear by tooth brushing and making the duration longer. In this study, just 6-week tooth brushing was performed, and it is not enough to regard it as a long-term data. So further study is needed and more perfect method for treating dentin hypersensitivity should be developed.

• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2003.11a
• /
• pp.568-568
• /
• 2003

I. Objectives This study investigated the effect of rewetting agent on dentinal microtensile bond strengths(${\mu}TBS$), using one bottle adhesives. II. Materials and Methods Non caries human molars were sectioned to exposed the superficial dentin surfaces, etched 15 seconds using 32% phosphoric acid and 10 seconds rinsed. Samples were randomly divided into two groups according to adhesives (Single Bond, One-Step) used. Each group were subdivided into five groups by different dentin surface treatment：15 second dry(D), blot dry(BD) or 15 second dry and rewetted with distrilled water(DW), Gluma Desensitizer(GD) and Aqua-Prep(AP) during 30 second, respectively.(omitted)

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.35 no.5
• /
• pp.313-320
• /
• 2010

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine changes in the dentinal fluid flow (DFF) during desensitizing agent application and to compare permeability after application among the agents. Materials and Methods: A Class 5 cavity was prepared to exposure cervical dentin on an extracted human premolar which was connected to a sub-nanoliter fluid flow measuring device (NFMD) under 20 cm water pressure. DFF was measured from before application of desensitizing agent (Seal&Protect, SP; SuperSeal, SS; BisBlock, BB; Gluma desensitizer, GL; Bi-Fluoride 12, BF) through application procedure to 5 min after application. Results: DFF rate after each desensitizing agent application was significantly reduced when compared to initial DFF rate before application (p < 0.05). SP showed a greater reduction in DFF rate than GL and BF did (p < 0.05). SS and BB showed a greater reduction in DFF rate than BF did (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Characteristic DFF aspect of each desensitizing agent was shown in NFMD during the application procedure.