This PhD thesis presents three independent in vitro studies. At part 1, dentine permeability was evaluated after in-office desensitizing treatments and their resistance to an erosive-abrasive cycling of 5 days; at part 2, dentine permeability was evaluated after application of desensitizing and/or anti-erosive toothpastes during an erosive-abrasive cycling of 5-day; and at part 3, dentine surface loss resulting from the use of desensitizing and/or anti-erosive toothpastes in an initial erosive-abrasive cycling model was evaluated. At parts 1 and 2 the dentinal tubules were opened with EDTA solution and the initial maximum permeability was analyzed (considered 100%). At part 1, the in-office desensitizing treatments were performed and the dentine permeability was reevaluated (%Lp-after treatment). In both studies, the specimens underwent a 5-day erosive-abrasive cycling. Each day consisted of 4 immersions in citric acid (2 minutes, 1%, pH ~ 2.6), and exposure to clarified human saliva for 60 minutes between the erosive challenges. Thirty minutes after the first and the last erosive challenge, the specimens were brushed in a brushing machine (2 N, 45 cycles) totalizing 2 minutes of exposure to the slurries formed by the mixture of toothpaste and human saliva. At part 1, a regular fluoride toothpaste was used for all groups and at part 2, the toothpastes were used according to each group. After the 5 days of cycling, the final dentine permeability (%Lp-after cycling) was evaluated. The same toothpastes tested at part 2 were also analyzed for surface loss (SL) at part 3. For this, the specimens had two parts of the surfaces protected with an adhesive tape leaving a central area exposed, and then were submitted to 5 cycles of initial erosion-abrasion. In each cycle, the specimens were immersed in artificial saliva (60 minutes, pH 7) and in citric acid (3 minutes, 1%, pH 3.6). Then, the specimens were brushed in a brushing machine (2 N, 25 cycles) with the slurries formed by the mixture of the toothpastes with artificial saliva, also totalizing 2 minutes of exposure to the slurries. For each study, the data of %Lp and SL were statistically analyzed. Part 1: The groups NUPRO and Gluma Desensitizer were the only ones that presented lower %Lp when compared to the negative control (p=0.026 and p=0.022, respectively), at both periods analyzed. Part 2: Regenerate and Sensodyne Pronamel toothpastes presented lower %Lp compared to the negative control group (p<0.05). Part 3: The groups showed different degrees of SL regardless of the claim of the toothpaste. Elmex Erosion Protection was the only group with low SL that differed from the positive control (p=0.031). It can be concluded that the in-office treatments NUPRO and Gluma Desensitizer, and the toothpastes Regenerate and Sensodyne Pronamel were able to significantly reduce the %Lp, in the model studied. Considering the SL, analyzed with an initial erosive-abrasive cycling model, toothpastes presented different degrees of SL, regardless of their claim, and Elmex Erosion Pr...