The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 25 , ISSUE 1 ( January, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Combined Effects of Glutaraldehyde-based Desensitizer and Nd: YAG Laser on Dentinal Tubules Occlusion

Alya H Alzarooni, Hatem M El-Damanhoury, Soumya S Aravind, Betul Rahman

Keywords : Dentinal hypersensitivity, Dentinal tubules, Desensitizing agents, Nd:YAG laser scanning electron microscopy

Citation Information : Alzarooni AH, El-Damanhoury HM, Aravind SS, Rahman B. Combined Effects of Glutaraldehyde-based Desensitizer and Nd: YAG Laser on Dentinal Tubules Occlusion. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024; 25 (1):52-57.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3623

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 17-02-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of Nd:YAG laser, glutaraldehyde-based desensitizer (GD), or their combination on occluding dentinal tubules. Materials and methods: Fifty dentin samples were obtained from non-carious human third molars and randomly divided into five groups (n = 10): (1) Control group treated with 37% phosphoric acid, (2) GD group, (3) Nd:YAG laser group (1064 nm, 100 µs, 10 Hz, 300 µm fiber, 1 W power, 100 mJ energy, and 85 J/cm2 energy density), (4) GD followed by Nd:YAG laser group, and (5) Nd:YAG laser followed by GD group. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to capture five images from each sample for analysis of dentinal tubules using Image J software. SEM/EDX elemental analysis was performed to determine the main mineral contents. Data analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test for statistical comparisons. Results: Laser and combination groups showed a significant decrease in dentinal tubule counts compared with the control and GD groups (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in open dentinal tubule counts between the control and GD groups, as well as between the laser and combination groups. However, significant differences were observed in the total area, average size of the tubules, and percentage area between the control group and the treatment groups (GD, laser, GD + laser, laser + GD). No significant difference was found in the Ca/P ratio between the tested groups. Conclusion: The use of Nd:YAG laser alone or in combination with GD was more effective in occluding dentinal tubules compared to GD alone. Clinical significance: This study has shown that Nd:YAG laser alone and in combination with GD has superior dentinal tubule occlusion in vitro. Its clinical use in the treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity may overcome the drawback of conventional treatment approaches for dentin hypersensitivity needing repeated applications to achieve continuous relief from pain since acidic diet and toothbrushing result in the continuing elimination of precipitates and surface coatings.

  1. Orchardson R, Gillam DG. Managing dentin hypersensitivity. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137(7):990–1029. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0321.
  2. Brännström M. Dentin sensitivity and aspiration of odontoblasts. J Am Dent Assoc 1963;66:366–370. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1963.0104.
  3. Azodo CC, Amayo AC. Dentinal sensitivity among a selected group of young adults in Nigeria. Niger Med J 2011;52(3):189–192. DOI: 10.4103/0300-1652.86136.
  4. Markowitz K, Pashley DH. Personal reflections on a sensitive subject. J Dent Res 2007;86(4):292–295. DOI: 10.1177/154405910708600401.
  5. Brännström M. Sensitivity of dentine. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1966;21(4):517–526. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(66)90411-7.
  6. Swift EJ Jr. Causes, prevention, and treatment of dentin hypersensitivity. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2004;25(2):95–110. PMID: 15645869.
  7. Schüpbach P, Lutz F, Finger WJ. Closing of dentinal tubules by Gluma desensitizer. Eur J Oral Sci 1997;105(5 Pt 1):414–421. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1997.tb02138.x.
  8. de Assis Cde A, Antoniazzi RP, Zanatta FB, et al. Efficacy of gluma desensitizer on dentin hypersensitivity in periodontally treated patients. Braz Oral Res 2006;20(3):252–256. DOI: 10.1590/s1806-83242006000300013.
  9. Gerschman JA, Ruben J, Gebart-Eaglemont J. Low level laser therapy for dentinal tooth hypersensitivity. Aust Dent J 1994;39(6):353–357. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1994.tb03105.x.
  10. Kimura Y, Wilder-Smith P, Yonaga K, et al. Treatment of dentine hypersensitivity by lasers: A review. J Clin Periodontol 2000;27(10): 715–721. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2000.027010715.x.
  11. Ladalardo TC, Pinheiro A, Campos RA, et al. Laser therapy in the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity. Braz Dent J 2004;15(2):144–150. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402004000200011.
  12. Dilsiz A, Aydin T, Canakci V, et al. Clinical evaluation of Er:YAG, Nd:YAG, and diode laser therapy for desensitization of teeth with gingival recession. Photomed Laser Surg 2010;28(Suppl. 2):S11–S17. DOI: 10.1089/pho.2009.2593.
  13. Solati M, Fekrazad R, Vahdatinia F, et al. Dentinal tubule blockage using nanobioglass in the presence of diode (980 nm) and Nd:YAG lasers: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 2022;26(3):2975–2981. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-04279-8.
  14. Bamise CT, Esan TA. Mechanisms and treatment approaches of dentine hypersensitivity: A literature review. Oral Health Prev Dent 2011;9(4):353–367.
  15. Machado AC, Maximiano V, Eduardo CD, et al. Associative protocol for dentin hypersensitivity using Nd: YAG laser and desensitizing agent in teeth with molar-incisor hypomineralization. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg 2019;37(4):262–266. DOI: 10.1089/photob.2018.4575.
  16. Absi EG, Addy M, Adams D. Dentine hypersensitivity. A study of the patency of dentinal tubules in sensitive and non-sensitive cervical dentine. J Clin Periodontol 1987;14(5):280–284. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1987.tb01533.x.
  17. Pashley DH, Livingston MJ, Greenhill JD. Regional resistances to fluid flow in human dentine in vitro. Arch Oral Biol 1978;23(9):807–810. DOI: 10.1016/0003-9969(78)90159-0.
  18. West NX, Hughes JA, Addy M. Dentine hypersensitivity: The effects of brushing toothpaste on etched and unetched dentine in vitro. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29(2):167–174. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00851.x.
  19. Gholami GA, Fekrazad R, Esmaiel-Nejad A, et al. An evaluation of the occluding effects of Er;Cr:YSGG, Nd:YAG, CO2 and diode lasers on dentinal tubules: A scanning electron microscope in vitro study. Photomed Laser Surg 2011;29(2):115–121. DOI: 10.1089/pho. 2009.2628.
  20. Duran I, Sengun A, Yildirim T, et al. In vitro dentine permeability evaluation of HEMA-based (desensitizing) products using split-chamber model following in vivo application in the dog. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32(1):34–38. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01132.x.
  21. Camps J, About I, Van Meerbeek B, et al. Efficiency and cytotoxicity of resin-based desensitizing agents. Am J Dent 2002;15(5):300–304. PMID: 12537338.
  22. Qin C, Xu J, Zhang Y. Spectroscopic investigation of the function of aqueous 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate/glutaraldehyde solution as a dentin desensitizer. Eur J Oral Sci 2006;114(4):354–359. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2006.00382.x.
  23. Goharkhay K, Wernisch J, Mortiz A. Dentin hypersensitivity In: Mortiz A (ed). Oral Laser Application. Berlin: Quintessenz, 2006; pp. 377–405.
  24. Abed AM, Mahdian M, Seifi M, et al. Comparative assessment of the sealing ability of Nd:YAG laser versus a new desensitizing agent in human dentinal tubules: A pilot study. Odontology 2011;99(1):45–48. DOI: 10.1007/s10266-010-0136-1.
  25. Naylor F, Aranha AC, Eduardo Cde P, et al. Micromorphological analysis of dentinal structure after irradiation with Nd:YAG laser and immersion in acidic beverages. Photomed Laser Surg 2006;24(6): 745–752. DOI:10.1089/pho.2006.24.745.
  26. Aghayan S, Fallah S, Chiniforush N. Comparative efficacy of diode, Nd:YAG and Er:YAG lasers accompanied by fluoride in dentinal tubule obstruction. J Lasers Med Sci 2021;19:12:e63. DOI: 10.34172/jlms.2021.63.
  27. Saluja M, Grover HS, Choudhary P. Comparative morphologic evaluation and occluding effectiveness of Nd: YAG, CO2 and diode lasers on exposed human dentinal tubules: an in vitro SEM Study. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10(7):ZC66–ZC70. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/18262.8188.
  28. Hsu PJ, Chen JH, Chuang FH, et al. The combined occluding effects of fluoride-containing dentin desensitizer and Nd–Yag laser irradiation on human dentinal tubules: An in vitro study. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2006;22(1):24–29. DOI: 10.1016/S1607-551X(09)70216-5.
  29. Lopes AO, Aranha AC. Comparative evaluation of the effects of Nd:YAG laser and a desensitizer agent on the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity: A clinical study. Photomed Laser Surg 2013;31(3): 132–138. DOI: 10.1089/pho.2012.3386.
  30. Farmakis ET, Beer F, Kozyrakis K, et al. The influence of different power settings of Nd:YAG laser irradiation, bioglass and combination to the occlusion of dentinal tubules. Photomed Laser Surg 2013;31(2):54–58. DOI: 10.1089/pho.2012.3333.
  31. Kumar NG, Mehta DS. Short-term assessment of the Nd:YAG laser with and without sodium fluoride varnish in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity–A clinical and scanning electron microscopy study. J Periodontol 2005;76(7):1140–1147. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2005.76. 7.1140.
  32. Xiao S, Liang K, Liu H, et al. effect of water-cooled Nd:YAG laser on dentinal tubule occlusion in vitro. Photomed Laser Surg 2017;35(2):98–104. DOI: 10.1089/pho.2016.4169.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.