Journal List > J Korean Acad Conserv Dent > v.35(5) > 1056425

Kim, Kim, and Lee: Real-time measurement of dentinal fluid flow during desensitizing agent application

Abstract

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.

Figures and Tables

Figure 1
(a) Schematic diagram of the sub-nanoliter scaled dentinal fluid flow measurement system connected to a specimen. (b) Specimen preparation.
jkacd-35-313-g001
Figure 2
A representative curve of consecutive dentinal fluid flow (DFF) during Bi-Fluoride 12 application. Upward (positive slope) movement vs time on graph indicates outward DFF, whereas downward (negative slope) movement indicates inward DFF. A, application of desensitizing agent; d, air dry.
jkacd-35-313-g002
Figure 3
A representative curve of consecutive DFF during Gluma desensitizer application. Upward (positive slope) movement vs time on graph indicates outward DFF, whereas downward (negative slope) movement indicates inward DFF. A, application of desensitizing agent; d, air dry; r, rinse.
jkacd-35-313-g003
Figure 4
A representative curve of consecutive DFF during BisBlock application. Upward (positive slope) movement vs time on graph indicates outward DFF, whereas downward (negative slope) movement indicates inward DFF. A, application of desensitizing agent; r, rinse.
jkacd-35-313-g004
Figure 5
A representative curve of consecutive DFF during SuperSeal application. Upward (positive slope) movement vs time on graph indicates outward DFF, whereas downward (negative slope) movement indicates inward DFF. A, application of desensitizing agent; ga, gentle air dry.
jkacd-35-313-g005
Figure 6
A representative curve of consecutive DFF during Seal&Protect application. Upward (positive slope) movement vs time on graph indicates outward DFF, whereas downward (negative slope) movement indicates inward DFF. A, application of desensitizing agent; LC, light-curing.
jkacd-35-313-g006
Figure 7
Reduction in dentinal fluid flow of desensitizing agents (%). Desensitizing agents under same bar did not show statistically significant difference.
jkacd-35-313-g007
Table 1
Components and application procedures of desensitizing agents used in this study
jkacd-35-313-i001

Abbreviations: PENTA, dipentaerythritol penta acrylate mono monophosphate; HEMA, Hydroxyethylmethacrylate;E&R, acid etching and rinse.

aE&R were omitted in this study because it was already performed during specimen preparation.

References

1. Brännström M, Lindén LA, Aström A. The hydrodynamics of the dental tubule and of pulp fluid. A discussion of its significance in relation to dentinal sensitivity. Caries Res. 1967. 1:310–317.
crossref
2. Pashley DH. Dentin permeability, dentin sensitivity, and treatment through tubule occlusion. J Endod. 1986. 12:465–474.
crossref
3. Absi EG, Addy M, Adams D. Dentine hypersensitivity. A study of the patency of dentinal tubules in sensitive and non-sensitive cervical dentine. J Clin Periodontol. 1987. 14:280–284.
crossref
4. Pashley DH. Addy M, Embrey G, Edgar WM, Orchardson R, editors. Potential treatment modalities for dentine hypersensitivity: in-office products. Tooth wear and sensitivity: clinical advances in restorative dentistry. 2000. London: Martis Dunitz;351–365.
5. Vieira AH, Santiago SL. Management of dentinal hypersensitivity. Gen Dent. 2009. 57:120–126.
6. Lee IB, Kim MH, Kim SY, Chang J, Cho BH, Son HH, Back SH. Development of nano-fluid movement measuring device and its application to hydrodynamic analysis of dentinal fluid. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2008. 33:141–147.
crossref
7. Kim SY, Cho BH, Baek SH, Lim BS, Lee IB. Real-time measurement of dentinal tubular fluid flow during and after amalgam and composite restorations. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2009. 34:467–476.
crossref
8. Ciucchi B, Bouillaguet S, Holz J, Pashley D. Dentinal fluid dynamics in human teeth, in vivo. J Endod. 1995. 21:191–194.
crossref
9. Pashley DH, Stewart FP, Galloway SE. Effects of air-drying in vitro on human dentine permeability. Arch Oral Biol. 1984. 29:379–383.
crossref
10. Itthagarun A, Tay FR, Pashley DH, Wefel JS, Garclía-Godoy F, Wei SH. Single-step, self-etch adhesives behave as permeable membranes after polymerization. Part III. Evidence from fluid conductance and artificial caries inhibition. Am J Dent. 2004. 17:394–400.
11. Camps J, About I, Van Meerbeek B, Franquin JC. Efficiency and cytotoxicity of resin-based desensitizing agents. Am J Dent. 2002. 15:300–304.
12. Pamir T, Dalgar H, Onal B. Clinical evaluation of three desensitizing agents in relieving dentin hypersensitivity. Oper Dent. 2007. 32:544–548.
crossref
13. Pereira JC, Segala AD, Gillam DG. Effect of desensitizing agents on the hydraulic conductance of human dentin subjected to different surface pre-treatments-an in vitro study. Dent Mater. 2005. 21:129–138.
crossref
14. Pashley DH, Galloway SE. The effects of oxalate treatment on the smear layer of ground surfaces of human dentine. Arch Oral Biol. 1985. 30:731–737.
crossref
15. Greenhill JD, Pashley DH. The effects of desensitizing agents on the hydraulic conductance of human dentin in vitro. J Dent Res. 1981. 60:686–698.
crossref
16. Paes Leme AF, dos Santos JC, Giannini M, Wada RS. Occlusion of dentin tubules by desensitizing agents. Am J Dent. 2004. 17:368–372.
17. Thrash WJ, Jones DL, Dodds WJ. Effect of a fluoride solution on dentinal hypersensitivity. Am J Dent. 1992. 5:299–302.
18. Yates RJ, Newcombe RG, Addy M. Dentine hypersensitivity: a randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled study of the efficacy of a fluoride-sensitive teeth mouthrinse. J Clin Periodontol. 2004. 31:885–889.
crossref
19. Qin C, Xu J, Zhang Y. Spectroscopic investigation of the function of aqueous 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate/glutaraldehyde solution as a dentin desensitizer. Eur J Oral Sci. 2006. 114:354–359.
crossref
20. Munksgaard EC. Amine-induced polymerization of aqueous HEMA/aldehyde during action as a dentin bonding agent. J Dent Res. 1990. 69:1236–1239.
crossref
21. Kakaboura A, Rahiotis C, Thomaidis S, Doukoudakis S. Clinical effectiveness of two agents on the treatment of tooth cervical hypersensitivity. Am J Dent. 2005. 18:291–295.
22. Ozen T, Orhan K, Avsever H, Tunca YM, Ulker AE, Akyol M. Dentin hypersensitivity: a randomized clinical comparison of three different agents in a short-term treatment period. Oper Dent. 2009. 34:392–398.
crossref
23. Davidson DF, Suzuki M. The Gluma bonding system: a clinical evaluation of its various components for the treatment of hypersensitive root dentin. J Can Dent Assoc. 1997. 63:38–41.
24. Ishihata H, Kanehira M, Nagai T, Finger WJ, Shimauchi H, Komatsu M. Effect of desensitizing agents on dentin permeability. Am J Dent. 2009. 22:143–146.
TOOLS
Similar articles