Clinical evaluation of the role of XXXX in a one-bottle adhesive.

@entity1 @entity26 @entity3584 @entity158 @entity1068
PURPOSE: To evaluate clinically whether the addition of @entity3584 to the one-bottle enamel-dentin adhesive Gluma Comfort Bond (GCB) has a desensitizing function, as insinuated by the brand name Gluma Comfort Bond+Desensitizer (GCB+D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two @entity158 studies following identical protocols were conducted in Abu Dhabi (A) and Bologna (B). Each of the 60 and 59 @entity1 selected, respectively, had two sensitive cervical tooth sites, characterized by a score three or higher on a five-step @entity158 scale: 1 (no), 2 (slight), 3 (mild), 4 (severe), 5 (very severe) discomfort upon application of a 2-second cold air stimulus. The buccal sensitive sites treated in A were generally small, in B larger and in most cases extending into the proximal tooth area. The @entity1 indicated their discomfort level according to the @entity158 scale prior to and immediately after topical application of GCB and GCB+D, respectively, and then at recalls after 1 week, 1 (A) or 3 (B) months, and 6 months. The data was statistically analyzed by chi2-tests (P < 0.05). RESULTS: With the cumulative scores 1 and 2, the following percentage success rates were found for GCB/GCB+D. A: postoperatively 93/98, 1 week and 1 month 98/98, and at 6 months 92/100. In B, the respective decrease in sensitivity was uniformly 43/100 throughout the entire evaluation period, postoperatively through 6 months. The 33 teeth (57%) of GCB with scores 3 and 4 in the B-study received a rescue treatment with Gluma Desensitizer immediately after the 1 week recall. This regimen reduced the sensitivity instantaneously to scores 1 and 2 until the end of the evaluation after 6 months. In the A-study, GCB+D was significantly more effective than GCB after 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months, in the B-study at all recall sessions. It is hypothesized that a thin film of adhesive applied to a sensitive area may not polymerize and seal the dentin surface adequately due to @entity26 inhibition. In particular, proximal sensitive tooth sites with poor access for adhesive application are suspected to remain inadequately sealed with a polymer film and thus sensitive. In this latter case however, @entity3584 as a component of the adhesive compound will result in coagulation of peripheral tubular liquid protein and thus desensitization, due to hampering of the liquid shift across the tubules upon excitation of a cold stimulus. In conclusion, @entity3584 played an active and effective role as a desensitizing agent, when added to the @entity1068 -water based one-bottle adhesive Gluma Comfort Bond.
