Search Results (3)

The main objective of this review is to verify the validity of laser therapy in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity, an extremely common problem in patients, with Nd: YAG lasers or high- and/or low-power diode lasers to obtain a definitive protocol for the treatment of hypersensitivity, given the multiplicity of laser treatments proposed by the numerous authors evaluated. The authors performed an electronic search on PubMed, favouring it as a search engine. Lasers represent a means of treating dentin hypersensitivity, used alone and/or in conjunction with specific products for the treatment of such a pathology. The selected articles that examined diode lasers were divided according to the wattage (w) used: low-level laser therapy protocols, i.e., those using a wattage of less than 1 W, and high-level laser therapy protocols, i.e., those using a wattage of 1 W or more. Regarding the Nd: YAG laser, it was not necessary to subdivide the studies in this way, as they used a wattage of 1 W or more. A total of 21 articles were included in the final selection. Laser therapy was found to be effective in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity. However, the level of effectiveness depends on the laser used. The results obtained from this review show that both the Nd: YAG laser and the diode laser (high and low power) are effective in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity. However, the high-power laser appears to be more effective in combination with fluoride varnish and the Nd: YAG laser achieved greater long-term benefits than the diode laser. Full article

In this retrospective study, data for three different laser-assisted approaches for the management of dentinal hypersensitivity (DH) was collected (n = 920 teeth). In total, 387 teeth were treated with photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy with 660 nm red light laser (PBM group), 327 were treated with the Nd:YAG laser (1064 nm) and 206 were treated with the Nd:YAP laser (1340 nm). To assess the effectiveness of each treatment, a visual analogue scale (VAS) was used, where zero represented no pain at all and ten represented the greatest pain. VAS was used before (T0), immediately after (T1), one week after (T2), four weeks after (T3), six months after (T4) and one year after treatment (T5). Means and standard deviations of VAS at different follow-up times were calculated. Values were compared within and between groups. Statistical significance was considered to be achieved when p-value was less than 0.05. Confidence level was proposed to be 99% with a P value lower than 0.001. Within groups, a statistically significant reduction was obtained when the mean value of VAS at T0 was compared with T5. At T5, the PBM group had the highest reduction of VAS (with mean value of 0), while the Nd:YAG and Nd:YAP groups had scores of 1.065 ± 0.674 and 4.665 ± 0.674, respectively. Conclusion: this retrospective study showed that PBM therapy and irradiation with Nd:YAG and Nd:YAP lasers are effective in managing DH pain. However, PBM therapy was the only procedure that showed complete pain relief at six and twelve months after treatment. Full article

Dentin hypersensitivity (DH) is a common medical condition with underreported prevalence and it is difficult to quantify. This study aimed to investigate whether assessing dental pulp vascular micro-dynamics by laser-Doppler flowmetry (LDF) would be functional for therapeutic evaluation, in contrast to a verbal rating scale (VRS). A split-mouth single-blind randomized study was conducted on seven patients and a total of 36 teeth. Two DH therapeutic methods were employed: (i) fluoride gel; (ii) Nd:YAG radiation combined with fluoride gel. For each tooth, five consecutive LDF determinations of pulp blood flow were made (before and immediately after desensitizing treatment, then after 24 h, 7 days, and 1 month), and the VRS was applied each time. Spearman’s correlation was applied for concurrent validation. Two-way (treatment and patient) repeated measures ANOVA full factorial was applied, followed by Tukey’s post-hoc comparisons and Pillai’s trace multivariate statistic. While VRS scores had moderate reliability, LDF could objectively estimate treatment effects. Based on partial eta-squared values, treatment and patient characteristics were estimated to explain about 84% and 50% of the variability, respectively. In conclusion, LDF is an objective technique that can quantitatively assess DH evolution, and it is effective in reliably monitoring oral health therapeutic interventions. Full article