Cargando…

Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations

Objective: The objective is to evaluate the efficacy of different desensitizing agents in the reduction of postoperative sensitivity after composite restoration. Materials and methods: Class I cavities were prepared in 39 patients by the same operator. The patients included in the study were between...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rajnekar, Rutuja, Mankar, Nikhil, Nikhade, Pradnya, Chandak, Manoj, Ikhar, Anuja, Burde, Karuna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9287591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35859967
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.25977
_version_ 1784748285412507648
author Rajnekar, Rutuja
Mankar, Nikhil
Nikhade, Pradnya
Chandak, Manoj
Ikhar, Anuja
Burde, Karuna
author_facet Rajnekar, Rutuja
Mankar, Nikhil
Nikhade, Pradnya
Chandak, Manoj
Ikhar, Anuja
Burde, Karuna
author_sort Rajnekar, Rutuja
collection PubMed
description Objective: The objective is to evaluate the efficacy of different desensitizing agents in the reduction of postoperative sensitivity after composite restoration. Materials and methods: Class I cavities were prepared in 39 patients by the same operator. The patients included in the study were between 20 and 45 years with vital pulp and a remaining dentin thickness of 1mm. Previously restored, nonvital and tooth with periodical changes were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned into three groups of 13 each - Group I (Control); Group II (Gluma desensitizer) and Group III (shield active desensitizer [SAD]). After the surface treatment, the teeth were restored with composite. The patients were assessed for postoperative sensitivity at 24 hours and one week with a visual analog scale (VAS). Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed using SPSS v23 software. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey test. Results: Gluma and SAD on comparison with control group i.e. composite group showed statistical significance difference at day 1 (P-value 0.003), but on comparing the sensitivity after one week, there is no significant difference in sensitivity score between all three groups (P-value 0.073). There was no statistically significant difference between day 1 and one week when comparing Gluma desensitizer and SAD. Conclusion: The application of the desensitizer led to a statistically significant reduction in postoperative sensitivity on day 1 and a clinically significant reduction was observed at one week.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9287591
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92875912022-07-19 Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations Rajnekar, Rutuja Mankar, Nikhil Nikhade, Pradnya Chandak, Manoj Ikhar, Anuja Burde, Karuna Cureus Dentistry Objective: The objective is to evaluate the efficacy of different desensitizing agents in the reduction of postoperative sensitivity after composite restoration. Materials and methods: Class I cavities were prepared in 39 patients by the same operator. The patients included in the study were between 20 and 45 years with vital pulp and a remaining dentin thickness of 1mm. Previously restored, nonvital and tooth with periodical changes were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned into three groups of 13 each - Group I (Control); Group II (Gluma desensitizer) and Group III (shield active desensitizer [SAD]). After the surface treatment, the teeth were restored with composite. The patients were assessed for postoperative sensitivity at 24 hours and one week with a visual analog scale (VAS). Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed using SPSS v23 software. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey test. Results: Gluma and SAD on comparison with control group i.e. composite group showed statistical significance difference at day 1 (P-value 0.003), but on comparing the sensitivity after one week, there is no significant difference in sensitivity score between all three groups (P-value 0.073). There was no statistically significant difference between day 1 and one week when comparing Gluma desensitizer and SAD. Conclusion: The application of the desensitizer led to a statistically significant reduction in postoperative sensitivity on day 1 and a clinically significant reduction was observed at one week. Cureus 2022-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9287591/ /pubmed/35859967 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.25977 Text en Copyright © 2022, Rajnekar et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Dentistry
Rajnekar, Rutuja
Mankar, Nikhil
Nikhade, Pradnya
Chandak, Manoj
Ikhar, Anuja
Burde, Karuna
Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations
title Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations
title_full Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations
title_fullStr Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations
title_short Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Desensitizers in Reducing Postoperative Sensitivity Following Composite Restorations
title_sort clinical efficacy of two different desensitizers in reducing postoperative sensitivity following composite restorations
topic Dentistry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9287591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35859967
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.25977
work_keys_str_mv AT rajnekarrutuja clinicalefficacyoftwodifferentdesensitizersinreducingpostoperativesensitivityfollowingcompositerestorations
AT mankarnikhil clinicalefficacyoftwodifferentdesensitizersinreducingpostoperativesensitivityfollowingcompositerestorations
AT nikhadepradnya clinicalefficacyoftwodifferentdesensitizersinreducingpostoperativesensitivityfollowingcompositerestorations
AT chandakmanoj clinicalefficacyoftwodifferentdesensitizersinreducingpostoperativesensitivityfollowingcompositerestorations
AT ikharanuja clinicalefficacyoftwodifferentdesensitizersinreducingpostoperativesensitivityfollowingcompositerestorations
AT burdekaruna clinicalefficacyoftwodifferentdesensitizersinreducingpostoperativesensitivityfollowingcompositerestorations