Comparative assessment of the sealing ability of Nd:YAG laser versus a new desensitizing agent in human dentinal tubules: a pilot study

Abstract

Dentinal hypersensitivity is a painful condition that occurs following periodontal treatment. Many treatment alternatives have been considered for this problem, including treatments with laser and dentinal adhesives. This study compared the sealing ability of Nd:YAG laser versus a new resin in scanning electron microscopy (SEM) micrographs. Ten human premolars were sectioned yielding 30 specimens of each premolar, which were randomly divided into three groups. The laser group was irradiated by Nd:YAG laser (1 W, 10 Hz, 60 s), the resin group was treated with the new Seal & Protect resin according to the manufacturer's instructions, and the third group served as the control group and did not receive any interventions. After preparation and gold coating of the samples, they were photographed by SEM at two magnifications (1500× and 4000×). The number and diameter (μm) of the dentinal tubules were recorded in selected fields, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey tests were used to determine significant differences between groups. The ANOVA results revealed significant differences in both the mean number (P < 0.001) and diameter (P < 0.05) among the three groups. Further statistical analysis showed a significant difference between the laser group and the resin group in both outcome measures (P < 0.05). Thus, both Nd:YAG laser and the new resin reduced the number and diameter of open dentinal tubules, a result that also explains the desensitization mechanism of these interventions. We further conclude that application of the new resin is more effective than Nd:YAG laser in minimizing the number and diameter of exposed dentinal tubules.

Effect of Different Irradiation Times on the Occlusion of Dentinal Tubules When Using a Nd:YAG Laser: An &lt;i&gt;in Vitro&lt;/i&gt; SEM Study

“…Differences between the four specimen disks were further reduced by a randomization of the four dentin test quadrants or regions on each specimen's coronal surface. As in previous studies [7] [9] [18], the smear layers produced by the diamond saw on the surfaces of the dentin specimens were removed by EDTA to avoid influencing the ef- fects of Nd:YAG laser irradiation and to simulate the exposed patent dentinal tubules found in instances of DH. A SEM magnification of 1500× was chosen for counting the number of occluded tubules in each selected field of view ( Table 3).…”

“…The magnification chosen reduced considerably the workload associated with counting tubules at a lower magnification of 1000×, as was used in a previous study [7]. Because the mean diameters of the coronal tubules in normal circumstances are only approximately 3 -5 µm [18], an increased magnification of 3000× was chosen for the measurement of their diameters. To avoid operator bias, the selection of the SEM fields and the subsequent data collection and statistical analysis were done independently by two blinded operators.…”

Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: a literature review

“…Thanks to the use of the SEM, the Author noted that the new resin was more effective than laser treatment (19).…”

Avaliação in vitro da condutibilidade hidráulica da dentina após a irradiação de diferentes parâmetros de laser associados ou não com verniz fluoretado

“…Segundo a literatura, a potência máxima que pode ser aplicada sobre uma dentina com 1mm de espessura é 1W (ABED et al, 2011), sendo importante salientar que esses resultados dependem de outros fatores como a frequência, tempo e modo de irradiação. De qualquer forma, a avaliação dos parâmetros de irradiação empregados é fundamental do ponto de vista da prevenção de alterações proteicas na dentina, bem como possíveis agressões ao tecido pulpar que são correlacionadas com variações de temperatura acima de 5ºC (KIMURA et al, 2000;BIRANG et al, 2007).…”

“…A potência e o tempo de irradiação, dentre outros, são parâmetros que determinam a quantidade de energia que é irradiada sobre a superfície dentária. Sugere-se que a potência máxima que pode ser aplicada sobre uma dentina com 1mm de espessura por exemplo, é 1W (ABED et al, 2011). Apesar disso, não existe um consenso em relação aos outros parâmetros que também podem influenciar no resultado final do tratamento.…”