These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Dentine hypersensitivity: development and evaluation ofamodel in situ to study tubulepatency.
    Author: Banfield N, Addy M.
    Journal: J Clin Periodontol; 2004 May; 31(5):325-35. PubMed ID: 15086613.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lesions of dentine hypersensitivity have numerous tubules open at the dentine surface as opposed to non-sensitive dentine where tubules are mostly covered by a smear layer. The present two studies were designed to model both states in situ and evaluate the effects of agents on the model. METHOD: Etched (sensitive) and smeared (non-sensitive) dentine specimens prepared from human third molar teeth were retained in lower buccal acrylic appliances. The results of Study 1 led to the development of a method to ensure tubules were sectioned at right angles. Study 1 was a 5-day period, seven treatment regimens randomised, part blind cross over design involving five subjects. Treatments were 2x day application of a desensitising (SA) or non-desensitising toothpastes (F) or chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwash with or without drinking orange juice (OJ)(1 l/day). A no treatment group (P) allowed plaque to accumulate. The evaluation of effects was observational by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Study 2 involved 1 subject, 4 treatments applied once and studied after 0, 6, and 12 h by SEM with image analysis. The 12 h groups were studied with and without imbibing water or OJ. Treatments were two desensitising (SA & SC) and one non-desensitising (F) toothpastes and an in office product (DS). RESULTS: Study 1: Treatment SA resulted in occlusion of tubules an outcome little changed by OJ. Treatment P produced a bio-film, which covered the dentine surface. CHX produced some tubule occlusion in three of the five subjects. F+/-OJ and CHX+OJ had little effect and tubules remained open. For smeared specimens toothpastes and OJ removed the smear layer but SA+/-OJ blocked tubules. P and CHX had no effect on the smear layer. Study 2: At 0 h, tubule occlusion was in order of magnitude DS>or=SA>SC>F. After 6 and 12 h with SA, SC and F some loss of occlusion occurred but not DS. Water and OJ by 12 h decreased occlusion for SA, SC and particularly F. Water and OJ removed virtually all of DS. CONCLUSIONS: The aims of Study 1 were achieved and effect of treatments was not inconsistent with data in vitro. The need for more standardisation of specimens was appreciated and applied in Study 2 to allow image analysis to quantitatively record data. Further use of the model in randomised controlled clinical trials is envisaged.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]