Ability of Two Novel Non-aqueous Solutions to Occlude Dentinal Tubules
J. GUZMAN, J. WAN, A.S. DEUTSCH, and B.L. MUSIKANT, Essential Dental Systems, South Hackensack, NJ
Objective: To microscopically evaluate the ability of two novel non-aqueous solutions to occlude dentinal tubules in vitro.
Methods: Eight extracted intact single-rooted anterior teeth were decoronated and split into two halves longitudinally with a diamond disc. The resulting sixteen dentin surfaces were etched with 50% citric acid in an ultrasonic bath for 20 minutes, air-dried for 30 seconds, and divided into four groups (n=4). Group A samples were left untreated as a control. Group B samples were treated with G5 All-Purpose Desensitizer, a commercial available desensitizing agent. Group C samples were treated with a shellac-based non-aqueous solution. Group D samples were treated with a HEMA-based non-aqueous solution. All of the samples were then examined under a scanning electron microscope at X1,000 magnification. Occlusion was scored for the apical third of each sample according to a numeric evaluation scale: 1, no exposed tubules; 2, few exposed tubules; 3, some exposed tubules; 4, numerous exposed tubules; 5, completely exposed tubules. Data were analyzed using 1-way ANOVA and the SNK multiple comparisons test at a significance level of p<0.05.
Results:
Group |
| Occlusion | |
|
| Mean | SNK |
Group A |
| 5.00 | C |
Group B |
| 2.25 | A |
Group C |
| 2.00 | A |
Group D |
| 3.00 | B |
Conclusions: All three solutions were found to occlude dentinal tubules. The shellac-based non-aqueous solution and G5 All-Purpose Desensitizer were significantly more effective in occluding dentinal tubules than the HEMA-based non-aqueous solution. There was no significant difference in dentinal tubule occlusion between a novel shellac-based non-aqueous solution and G5 All-Purpose Desensitizer.