10.59987/ads/2015.3-4.75-80
The purpose of this literature review was to evaluate the effectiveness of the laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. A review with inclusion and exclusion criteria was performed from January 2009 to December 2014 with electronic data-bases: MedLine via PubMed, Science Direct and Cochrane Library. Research of paper magazines by hand was not considered. Fortythree articles were selected between literature reviews, in vitro studies, clinical trials, pilot and preliminary studies. The items were divided into laser-used groups for an accurate description, and then the reading of results into various typologies. Laser-assisted treatment reduces dentinal hypersensitivity-related pain, but also a psychosomatic component must be considered, so further studies and more suitable follow-ups are necessary.
application/pdf
1971-1441
82
3-4
en
G. Farronato
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Annali di stomatologia
laser therapy
Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: a literature review
Text.Serial.Journal
https://www.annalidistomatologia.eu/ads
6
Review article
2022-08-12
2022-08-12
2015-12-01
2023-12-04
75-80
Ann Stomatol (Roma)
G. Farronato
2015
10.59987/ads/2015.3-4.75-80
75
Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Unit of Orthodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Milan; Fondazione Cà Granda IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, UOC di Chirurgia Maxillo-Facciale ed Odontostomatologia, Milan, Italy
1971-1441
3-4
laser therapy
en
80
Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: a literature review
https://www.annalidistomatologia.eu/ads/article/download/82/70
6
                                                                                                         Review article



    Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal
    hypersensitivity: a literature review




                                                                                                          i
                                                                                                        al
                                                                                                     on
    Roberto Biagi, MD, DDS1                                      Introduction
    Gianguido Cossellu, DDS, PhD1
    Michele Sarcina, DDS1                                        Dentinal hypersensitivity (DH), or cervical dentinal
    Ilaria Tina Pizzamiglio, RDH 2                               sensitivity, is a frequent clinical disorder. It is defined
    Giampietro Farronato, MD, DDS1                               as pain arising from exposed dentine typically in re-




                                                                                            zi
                                                                 sponse to thermal, chemical, tactile or osmotic stim-
                                                                 uli, and it appears to be a common problem with vari-
                                                                 ous reports indicating an incidence between 4 to 74%




                                                                              na
    1   Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sci-       among the population. The high variation in preva-
        ences, Unit of Orthodontics and Paediatric Den-          lence rate among most studies on dentin hypersensi-
        tistry, School of Dentistry, University of Milan; Fon-   tivity should be explained by the bias concerning the
        dazione Cà Granda IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore                highly selected population such as patients at dental




                                                                   er
        Policlinico, UOC di Chirurgia Maxillo-Facciale ed        clinics, students, or hospitalized patients (1-8).
        Odontostomatologia, Milan, Italy                         Dentinal hypersensitivity may be caused by several
    2   Private Practice of Dental Hygiene                       conditions such as a result of periodontal patholo-
                                                                 gies, trauma, dental bleaching, professional oral hy-



                                                           t     giene, acid foods and beverages, bad oral hygiene

    Corresponding author:
                                                        In       habits or incorrect brushing techniques with conse-
                                                                 quent gingival recessions, etc. Even the removal of
    Roberto Biagi                                                orthodontic fixed appliances could expose teeth to
    Fondazione Cà Granda IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore                 hypersensitivity. It seems that DH is rarely a result of
    Policlinico, UOC di Chirurgia Maxillo-Facciale ed            just one of above factors, but rather a combination of
                                               ni
    Odontostomatologia                                           more than one.
    Via della Commenda, 10                                       Patients are usually treated with topical desensitizing
    20122 Milano, Italia                                         fluorine pastes and sealants. Even the aesthetic filling
                                    io

    E-mail: roberto.biagi@unimi.it                               of eroded or exposed dental necks seems to be a good
                                                                 practice for pain reduction. Only in last decades these
                                                                 procedures have been supported by a laser-assisted
                                                                 treatment, often combined with classic desensitizing.
                           iz



    Summary                                                      The use of lasers for DH treatment dates back to the
                                                                 ’80s with the advent of the erbium laser. Although the
    The purpose of this literature review was to evalu-          initial results were quite disappointing, the improvement
           Ed




    ate the effectiveness of the laser-assisted treat-           of technologies and scientific knowledge over the years
    ment of dentinal hypersensitivity. A review with             optimized instrumentation and created new lasers with
    inclusion and exclusion criteria was performed               wavelengths suitable for the treatment (9-11).
    from January 2009 to December 2014 with elec-                Most of the studies conducted with various types of
    tronic data-bases: MedLine via PubMed, Science               lasers, at different wavelengths and application times,
    Direct and Cochrane Library. Research of paper               reveal the effectiveness of this treatment, both imme-
IC




    magazines by hand was not considered. Forty-                 diately and during follow-up after approximately 6
    three articles were selected between literature re-          months from the first treatment. As a result, the pain
    views, in vitro studies, clinical trials, pilot and          is reduced and in many cases it even disappears. Of-
    preliminary studies. The items were divided into             ten the laser therapy is integrated with the use of de-
C




    laser-used groups for an accurate description,               sensitizing agents based on fluorine or newly discov-
    and then the reading of results into various ty-             ered substances, and this can lead to an improve-
    pologies. Laser-assisted treatment reduces denti-            ment in results (9, 12, 13).
    nal hypersensitivity-related pain, but also a psy-           Referring to the course of action, it was shown how
©




    chosomatic component must be considered, so                  the low-power lasers, including the GaAlAs diode
    further studies and more suitable follow-ups are             laser with a wavelength between 780 and 900 nm,
    necessary.                                                   acts on the nervous level, thus eliminating the sensi-
                                                                 tivity. The medium-power lasers, including Nd:YAG,
    Key words: dentinal hypersensitivity, dentinal               CO2 and Er:YAG laser, desensitize causing narrow-
    tubules, desensitizing agent, laser therapy.                 ing and occlusion of dentinal tubules (10, 11).



    Annali di Stomatologia 2015; VI (3-4): 75-80                                                                         75
    R. Biagi et al.


    The purpose of this literature review is to evaluate the    Inclusion criteria:
    effectiveness of the various types of lasers used in        - in vivo and in vitro studies
    dentistry for the DH treatment, and to assess their va-     - literature reviews, pilot studies, preliminary studies
    lidity both in the immediacy and after a follow-up.             and clinical trials with and without use of placebo
                                                                    substances




                                                                                                           i
                                                                - studies in which the laser-assisted desensitization




                                                                                                         al
    Materials and methods                                           treatment was effected by means of the medium-
                                                                    or low-power.
    Research strategies




                                                                                                      on
    The following electronic databases have been evaluated:     Results
    MEDLINE (via PubMed; www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed),
    Science Direct (www.sciencedirect.com) and the regis-       Studies selection
    ter of clinical trials and Cochrane reviews (Cochrane Li-




                                                                                            zi
    brary; www.cochranelibrary.com). There has been no          Forty-three articles have been selected. The ap-
    research done manually with paper magazines. The            proach starts from selection between literature re-
    time limit was from January 2009 to December 2014.          views, in vitro studies, clinical trials, pilot and prelimi-




                                                                             na
    The databases were consulted using the following            nary studies per annum.
    key words crossed in various ways:                          The items will be divided into laser-used groups for
    (dental OR dentine OR tooth OR teeth OR cervix OR           an accurate description, and then the reading of re-
    cement) AND (sensitive OR hypersensitivity) AND             sults into various typologies.




                                                                  er
    laser. Initially, the research was set without the use of
    Boolean values and removing the parentheses:
    dental sensitive laser, dental hypersensitivity laser,      Nd:YAG laser
    dentine sensitive laser, dentine hypersensitivity laser,



                                                          t
    tooth sensitive laser, tooth hypersensitivity laser, cer-   The efficiency of the Nd:YAG laser (neodymium-
                                                       In
    vical sensitive laser, cervical hypersensitivity laser,
    cement sensitive laser, cement hypersensitivity laser,
                                                                doped yttrium aluminium garnet; Nd3+:Y3Al5O12) and
                                                                common desensitizing pastes for the reduction of the
    teeth sensitive laser, teeth hypersensitivity laser.        dentinal tubules lumen have been evaluated. Far-
    The second type of research involved the Boolean            makis et al. (14) evaluated the efficacy of the Nd:YAG
    value “AND”:                                                against a desensitizing paste (Novamine®). Subjects
                                          ni
    dental AND sensitive AND laser, dental AND hyper-           were divided into groups depending on the use of on-
    sensitivity AND laser, dentine AND sensitive AND            ly paste, only laser (0,5 W) or both. The SEM analy-
    laser, dentine AND hypersensitivity AND laser, tooth        sis showed that the first group expressed greater oc-
                                 io

    AND sensitive AND laser, tooth AND hypersensitivity         clusion of dentinal tubules than the second one. A
    AND laser, cervix AND sensitive AND laser, cervix           year later, Farmakis et al. (15) proposed another
    AND hypersensitivity AND laser, cement AND sensi-           study with different laser powers, both 0,5 and 1 W.
    tive AND laser, cement AND hypersensitivity AND             In this case the 1 W laser, either alone or in combina-
                        iz



    laser, teeth AND sensitive AND laser, teeth AND hy-         tion with desensitizing paste, was more effective
    persensitivity AND laser. The third type of the re-         compared to 0,5 W laser.
    search has been carried out using both AND and OR           Al-Saud and Al-Nahedh (16) used other types of de-
          Ed




    Boolean values:                                             sensitizing paste (Gluma®, TenureQuicl®, Quell and
    (dental OR dentine OR tooth OR teeth OR cervix OR           VivaSens®) instead and divided subjects in random
    cement) AND sensitive AND laser, (dental OR den-            groups in order to highlight that the best method to
    tine OR tooth OR teeth OR cervix OR cement) AND             completely occlude or reduce the dentinal tubules di-
    hypersensitivity AND laser. The last research method        ameter was Nd:YAG anyway.
    was achieved by keywords:                                   An in vivo study evaluated the difference in reducing
IC




    laser, hypersensitivity without Boolean values. The         DH among the Nd:YAG laser and Gluma®. Patients
    research methodology has identified about 150 scien-        were divided into three groups (only Gluma®, only
    tific papers.                                               laser and both) and pain levels were analyzed 5’, 1
                                                                week, 1-3-6 months after with VAS. Although all pro-
C




                                                                tocols have demonstrated a marked reduction in pain
    Criteria                                                    even after six months, the combination of laser and
                                                                paste remains the most significant treatment (17).
    Exclusion criteria have been selected:                      Some Authors introduced a potassium binoxalate gel
©




    - presence of pediatric patients                            and evaluated the efficacy in combination with laser
    - studies without complete statistical data                 or alone with VAS after cold air and hot water stimu-
    - at least 3 months’ follow-up studies                      lation. Data were carried out immediately, 3-6-9
    - in vivo studies without measuring by Visual Ana-          months after with the aid of electron microscope.
       log Scale (VAS) and Verbal Rating Scale (VRS)            Thanks to the merger of dentinal tubules, laser treat-
    - case series                                               ment is better in durability, even if the gel appears as
    - case reports.                                             a valid aid for its micro-crystals penetration (18).

    76                                                                             Annali di Stomatologia 2015; VI (3-4): 75-80
    Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: a literature review


    Abded et al. divided subjects into three groups, with             The in vitro studies, after SEM observation, produced
    laser (1 W for 60’’), with a new desensitizing agent              very positive results concerning the immediate occlu-
    (Seal & Protect™) and no-treatment. Thanks to the                 sion of dentinal tubules. Aranha and Eduardo (32) set
    use of the SEM, the Author noted that the new resin               laser to a power of 0,25 and 0,5 W and highlighted
    was more effective than laser treatment (19).                     carbonization and dentin fracture as well as lacking




                                                                                                              i
                                                                      closure of dentinal tubules. Yilmaz et al. (33) con-




                                                                                                            al
                                                                      firmed immediate pain relief in the group treated with
    Diode laser                                                       laser compared to placebo. The association between
                                                                      laser and glutaraldehyde desensitizing paste




                                                                                                         on
    In the last years, the diode laser (DL) has been the              (Gluma®) confirms the usefulness of this treatment in
    most used by dental hygienists during daily work. The             the long term (up to 6 months later) (34).
    literature contains a good amount of studies about                Always Aranha and Eduardo (35) have divided 28 sub-
    this type of laser, particularly its effectiveness against        jects into 4 groups. The first group received instructions




                                                                                                zi
    dentinal hypersensitivity (20, 21).                               about nutrition and oral hygiene, and no-power laser
    Hashim et al. (22) carried out an in vivo study on 14             treatment (0 W), the second was treated with Er:YAG
    teeth of five different patients using a diode laser (0,5         laser for 20’’, while the third and fourth one with




                                                                                   na
    W). Moreover, subjects have been divided into two                 Er,Cr:YSGG (respectively with 0,25 and 0,5 W for 30’’).
    groups based on laser exposure (30 and 60’’) and                  Data underlined how each treatment reduces, although
    checked 15’ and seven days after. Authors demon-                  partially, the hypersensitivity pain, but treatments with
    strated that the 60’’ exposure is the most effective.             0,25 W Er,Cr:YSGG laser are the most efficient.
    Often, this type of laser has been used in combina-               A recent study combines the laser sealing effect with




                                                                        er
    tion with 3% potassium nitrate or potassium oxalate               a tooth paste nano-carbonate apatite made. Data are
    gel (23-25). Even fluoride gels are often aid in the hy-          encouraging new research with statistical analysis
    persensitivity treatment (26).                                    and long-term results (36).
    In 2012, Romeo et al. (27) divided subjects into three



                                                             t
    groups: with fluoride gel (60’’), with 0,5 W laser and with
    both. The VAS reduction and better results over time
                                                          In          Comparison between different lasers
    were detected in both groups, although laser treatment
    reported a marked improvement over the initial situation.         After the previous disquisition regarding studies on a
    Aranha et al. (28) compared different types of prod-              single type of laser, associated or not to other agents,
    ucts. Gluma® has been applied for 30’ with cotton                 it is interesting to evaluate the comparative works be-
                                               ni
    swab on tooth surfaces (Heraeus Kulzer, Armonk, NY,               tween various commercial types of lasers. These
    USA), Seal & Protect™ (Dentsply, Petrópolis, RJ,                  studies are very heterogeneous, both in wavelengths
    Brazil) for 20’’, 3% Oxa Gel potassium oxalate for 2’             and frequency used, for both samples and the treat-
                                    io


    and APF (acidulated phosphate fluoride) for 1’. Lastly,           ment duration (37). Also in this section the effective-
    the laser treatment has been used. Although all these             ness of CO2 laser will be debated, despite the paucity
    protocols have led to a hypersensitivity reduction,               of literature on its individual use in last years.
                           iz



    laser therapy has very long term desensitizing effects.           Romano et al. (38) indeed stress the sealing power of
    The recent introduction of cyanoacrylate has invali-              the CO 2 laser. Subjects have been divided into 7
    dated the diode laser as the excellence therapeutic               groups and treated with only laser (0,5-1-1,5 W) or
          Ed




    tool. Flecha et al. (29) have shown how cyanoacry-                with laser and a calcium hydroxide paste. The tubular
    late has the same efficiency, but with lower cost and             occlusion has been detected in each study group al-
    without side effects. Lin et al. (30) could evaluate how          though the paste produced a higher reduction in hy-
    there are no real differences in terms of pain reduc-             persensitivity. Furthermore, samples treated exclu-
    tion between laser therapy, desensitization of the                sively with laser have also highlighted dentinal car-
    nerve or their combination.                                       bonization or cracks.
IC




    A recent in vitro study, however, focuses on both the             Two clinical studies, on the other hand, compared the
    sealing ability and the potential danger of laser at the          CO2 and Er:YAG lasers. Patients have been random-
    expanse of dental pulp. Umana et al. (31) have used               ly assigned to the different groups, treated with only
    different laser powers (0,8 - 1 - 1,6 - 2 W) on 24 extract-       laser therapy, in association with fluoride gel or just
C




    ed teeth and concluded that the 0,8 or 1 W laser irradi-          placebo. The best results have been obtained with
    ation for 10’’ can seal dentinal tubules without damage.          the aid of the laser in association to gel (39, 40).
                                                                      In a comparative in vitro study the Er,Cr:YSGG (0,25
                                                                      W), the Nd:YAG (1 W), the CO2 (1 W) and the diode
    Er:YAG and Er,Cr:YSGG lasers                                      (810 nm, 2 W) lasers have been evaluated. Although a
©




                                                                      diameter reduction of dentinal tubules has been de-
    A more thorough analysis reserved to the old and                  tected in all groups, the best result was obtained with
    more powerful lasers, such as the Er:YAG (erbium-                 Nd:YAG laser (53%) (41). Another study compares
    doped yttrium aluminium garnet; Er3+:Y3Al5O12) and                similar types of lasers: CO2 and Er:YAG lasers are ef-
    the Er,Cr:YSGG (erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandi-                 fective in treating DH and reducing its symptoms, even
    um-gallium garnet; Er3+:Y3Sc2Ga3O12).                             if the Er:YAG laser has a more significant effect (42).

    Annali di Stomatologia 2015; VI (3-4): 75-80                                                                             77
    R. Biagi et al.


    Table 1. Summary of the main conclusions of the studies considered for the review.

    Pro laser treatment                                            Against laser treatment
    All types of laser treatments are more effective than          Resins recently released onto the market appear to be in
    traditional methods when used in association with gel or       some studies more effective than laser treatment




                                                                                                                  i
    desensitizing tooth paste




                                                                                                                al
    Laser treatment combined with home therapy using               Also some adhesives such as cyanoacrylate are more
    a specific toothpaste produces longer lasting effects          effective than laser
    compared with traditional methods




                                                                                                             on
    Compared with other lasers, diode lasers produce               SEM analysis show a similar reduction of the tubular
    a gradual symptoms improvement that also lasts longer          diameter in both treatments
    Other kinds of laser induce an immediate pain reduction,       The laser treatment can produce a significant placebo
    but the results don’t last as long                             effect




                                                                                                   zi
    Some Authors have shown the superiority of Nd:YAG,             tists. Studies are clarifying the follow-up results within
    Er:YAG and CO2 treatment compared to conventional              the interference of the placebo effect. The DL has




                                                                                   na
    topical products, but between these and the diode              specific wavelengths resulting very safe for the pa-
    laser the situation is not well defined (43-46).               tient and, above all, not causing side effects or dam-
    Taking into consideration the placebo effect, it is absent     age on the pulp as it is the case in older and powerful
    for the diode laser, Er:YAG and Nd:YAG, except the             systems such as Er,Cr:YSGG or Er:YAG lasers.




                                                                      er
    Er,Cr:YSGG results (47). Blatz (48) obtained further da-       However, in vitro studies confirm a real effectiveness
    ta: the Nd:YAG, Er:YAG and CO2 laser-treatments are            of these lasers. Thanks to the SEM analysis, the per-
    slightly higher than the classic desensitizing topical         centage of occlusion appears to be complete and the
    products, but Yilmaz et al. (49) in a randomized con-          diameter of dentinal tubules reduced (50, 51).
    trolled clinical trial, highlighted the equal effectiveness


                                                               t
    of the diode laser (60’’) and the Er,Cr:YSGG laser
    (30’’). Therefore data indicated a small difference be-
                                                            In     Conclusions
    tween two laser treatments, thus underlining contradic-
    tions in literature.                                           Although it would seem that the laser treatment effec-
    Table 1 summarizes the main conclusions of the                 tively reduces pain symptoms, further studies and
                                            ni
    studies included in this review.                               more suitable follow-ups are necessary. Another im-
                                                                   portant consideration regards the reduced presence
                                                                   of side effects in the matter of new generation lasers,
                                  io

    Discussion                                                     already set up by the manufacturer and supplied with
                                                                   specific protocols for each treatment. The Diode
    This literature review proposes to analyze recent              Laser has to be preferred for DH treatment thanks to
    years’ publications, although they were a lot and              its use in safety and beneficial clinical results.
                          iz



    sometimes at odds with each other, related to differ-          More clarity should be obtained on the topic “placebo
    ent lasers for dental hypersensitivity treatment.              effect”. In many cases it was found that patients un-
    The laser-assisted treatment of dentine hypersensitiv-         dergoing placebo still receive benefits with a reduc-
          Ed




    ity is a good method to solve immediate and long-              tion of the VAS values. These considerations do not
    term pain. Compared to conventional desensitizing              exclude a psychosomatic component of dentinal hy-
    topical agents, the laser treatment, although more ex-         persensitivity.
    pensive, leads to rapid results with less application          In consideration of all data gathered, it can be said
    time and more quickly for the patient. In most of the          that laser is an innovative and faster treatment both
    articles, fluoride gel or desensitizing substances used        in terms of therapy time and results, with minimal
IC




    in combination with laser light can potentiate effects.        side effects and greater comfort for patients, which
    The same line of reasoning is considered valid for the         appear more satisfied with traditional methods.
    association with desensitizing pastes.
    New substances as cyanoacrylate, glutaraldehyde
C




    and potassium binoxalate are spreading for the prop-           Acknowledgements
    erties to stimulate laser beneficial effects and they
    can be used alone as preventative measures in pa-              The Authors would like to thank Dr. Silvia Faverzani
    tients with mild hypersensitivity. However, the effec-         Gibbs for editing the English text.
©




    tiveness of these treatments has clashed sometimes
    with the existence of a placebo effect.
    In the majority of studies, patients have a decrease in        References
    VAS from baseline both immediately and over time,
    till six months after treatment.                                 1. Rees JS. The prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity in gen-
    The diode laser appears to be the most widely used                  eral dental practice in the UK. J Clin Periodontol. 2000;27:860-
    in everyday practice by dental hygienists and den-                  865.


    78                                                                                   Annali di Stomatologia 2015; VI (3-4): 75-80
    Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: a literature review


     2. Orchardson R, Collins WJ. Clinical features of hypersensi-               in southern Brazil: A 3-month follow-up. Acta Odontol
        tive teeth. Br Dent J. 1987;162:253-56.                                  Scand. 2013;71:1469-1474.
     3. Bamise CT, Kolawole KA, Oloyede EO, Esan TA. Tooth sen-            22.   Hashim NT, Gasmalla BG, Sabahelkheir AH. Effect of the
        sitivity experience among residential university students. Int           clinical application of the diode laser (810 nm) in the treat-
        J Dent Hyg. 2010;8:95-100.                                               ment of dentine hypersensitivity. BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:31.




                                                                                                                           i
     4. Liu HC, Lan WH, Hsieh CC. Prevalence and distribution of           23.   Sicilia A, Cuesta-Frechoso S, Suàrez A, Angulo J, Por-




                                                                                                                         al
        cervical dentin hypersensitivity in a population in Taipei, Tai-         domingo A, De Juan P. Immediate efficacy of diode laser ap-
        wan. J Endod. 1998;24:45-47.                                             plication in the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity in pe-
     5. Costa RS, Rios FS, Moura MS, Jardim JJ, Maltz M, Haas                    riodontal maintenance patients: a randomized clinical trial.
        AN. Prevalence and risk indicators of dentin hypersensitiv-              J Clin Periodontol. 2009;36:650-660.




                                                                                                                      on
        ity in adult and elderly populations from Porto Alegre,            24.   Vieira AH, Passos VF, de Assis JS, Mendoça JS, Santiago
        Brazil. J Periodontol. 2014;85:1247-1258.                                SL. Clinical evaluation of a 3% potassium oxalate gel and
     6. Taani SD, Awartani F. Clinical evaluation of cervical dentine            a GaAIAs laser for the treatment of dentinal hypersensitiv-
        sensitivity (CDS) in patients attending general dentalclinicas           ity. Photomed Laser Surg. 2009;27:807-812.
        (GDC) and periodontal speciality clinics (PSC). J Clin Peri-       25.   Raichur PS, Setty SB, Thakur SL. Comparative evaluation




                                                                                                           zi
        odontol. 2002;29:118-122.                                                of diode laser, stannous fluoride gel, and potassium nitrate
     7. West NX, Sanz M, Lussi A, Bartlett D, Bouchard P, Bourgeois              gel in the treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. Gen Dent.
        D. Prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity and study of as-               2013;61:66-71.




                                                                                           na
        sociated factors: a European population-based cross-sec-           26.   Yilmaz HG, Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S, Cengiz E. Long-term effect
        tional study. J Dent. 2013;41:841-851.                                   of diode laser irradiation compared to sodium fluoride var-
     8. Rees JS, Jin LJ, Lam S, Kudanowska I, Vowles R. The preva-               nish in the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity in periodontal
        lence of dentine hypersensitivity in a hospital clinic popula-           maintenance patients: a randomized controlled clinical
        tion in Hong Kong. J Dent. 2003;31:453-461.                              study. Photomed Laser Surg. 2011;29:721-725.




                                                                             er
     9. Bamise CT, Esan TA. Mechanisms and treatment ap-                   27.   Romeo U, Russo C, Palaia G, Tenore G, Del Vecchio A.
        proaches of dentine hypersensitivity: a literature review. Oral          Treatment of dentine hypersensitivity by diode laser: a clin-
        Health Prev Dent. 2011;9:353-367.                                        ical study. Int J Dent Art. 2012;ID 858950.
    10. Asnaashari M, Moeini M. Effectiveness of lasers in the treat-      28.   Aranha AC, Pimenta LA, Marchi GM. Clinical evaluation of
        ment of dentin hypersensitivity. J Lasers Med Sci. 2013;                 desensitizing treatments for cervical dentin hypersensitivi-
        4:1-7.


                                                                    t            ty. Braz Oral Res. 2009;23:333-339.
    11. Kimura Y, Wilder-Smith P, Yonaga K, Matsumoto K. Treat-
                                                                 In        29.   Flecha OD, Azevedo CG, Matos FR, Vieira-Barbosa NM,
        ment of dentine hypersensitivity by lasers: a review. J Clin             Ramos-Jorge ML,Gonçalves PF, Koga Silva EM. Cyano-
        Periodontol. 2000;27:715-721.                                            acrylate versus laser in the treatment of dentin hypersensi-
    12. Porto IC, Andrade AK, Montes MA. Diagnosis and treat-                    tivity: a controlled, randomized, double-masker and non-in-
        ment of dentinal hypersensitivity. J Oral Sci. 2009;51:323-              feriority clinical trial. J Periodontol. 2013;84:287-294.
                                                 ni
        332.                                                               30.   Lin PY, Cheng YW, Chu CY, Chien KL, Lin CP, Tu YK. In-
    13. da Rosa WL, Lund RG, Piva E, da Silva AF.The effective-                  office treatment for dentin hypersensitivity: a sistematic re-
        ness of current dentin desensitizing agents used to treat den-           view and network meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2013;
        tal hypersensitivity: a systematic review. Quintessence Int.             40:53-64.
                                      io


        2013;44:535-546.                                                   31.   Umana M, Heysselaer D, Tielemans M, Compere P, Zeinoun
    14. Farmakis ET, Kozyrakis K, Khabbaz MG, Schoop U, Beer                     T, Nammour S. Dentinale tubules sealing by means of diode
        F, Moritz A. In vitro evaluation of dentin tubule occlusion by           lasers (810 and 980 nm): a preliminary in vitro study. Pho-
                            iz



        Denshield and Neodymium-doped yttrium-aluminium-garnet                   tomed Laser Surg. 2013;31:307-314.
        laser irradiation. J Endod. 2012;38:662-666.                       32.   Aranha AC, de Paula Eduardo C. In vitro effects of
    15. Farmakis ET, Beer F, Kozyrakis K, Pantazis N, Moritz A. The              Er,Cr:YSGG laser on dentine hypersensitivity. Dentine per-
        influence of different power settings of Nd:YAG laser irra-              meability and scanning electron microscopy analysis. Lasers
          Ed




        diation, bioglass and combination to the occlusion of denti-             Med Sci. 2012;27:827-834.
        nal tubules. Photomed Laser Surg. 2013;31:54-58.                   33.   Yilmaz HG, Cengiz E, Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S, Leblebicioglu B.
    16. Al-Saud LM, Al-Nahedh HN. Occluding effect of Nd:YAG laser               Effectiveness of Er:Cr:YSGG laser on dentine hypersensitivity:
        and different dentin desensitizing agents on human dentinal              a controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2011;38:341-346.
        tubules in vitro: a scanning electron microscopy investiga-        34.   Ehlers V, Ernst CP, Reich M, Kämmerer P, Willershausen
        tion. Oper Dent. 2012;37:340-355.                                        B. Clinical comparison of Gluma and Er:YAG laser treatment
    17. Lopes AO, Aranha AC. Comparative evaluation of the effects               of cervically exposed hypersensitive dentin. Am J Dent.
IC




        of Nd:YAG laser and a desensitizer agent on the treatment                2012;25:131-135.
        of dentin hypersensitivity: a clinical study. Photomed Laser       35.   Aranha AC, de Paula Eduardo C. Effects of Er:YAG and
        Surg. 2013;31:132-138.                                                   Er,Cr:YSGG lasers on dentine hypersensitivity. Short-term
    18. Talesara K, Kulloli A, Shetty S, Kathariya R. Evaluation of              clinical evaluation. Lasers Med Sci. 2012;27:813-818.
C




        potassium binoxalate gel and Nd:YAG laser in the man-              36.   Han SY, Jung HI, Kwon HK, Kim BI. Combined effects of
        agement of dentinal hypersensitivity: a split-mouth clinical             Er:YAG laser and Nano-Carbonate apatite dentifrice on denti-
        and ESEM study. Lasers Med Sci. 2014;29:61-68.                           nal tubule occlusion: in vitro study. Photomed Laser Surg.
    19. Abded AM, Mahdian M, Seifi M, Ziaei SA, Shamsaei M. Com-                 2013;31:342-348.
        parative assessment of the sealing ability of Nd:YAG laser         37.   Bader J, Balevi B, Farsai P, Flores-Mir C, Gunsolley J,
©




        versus a new desensitizing agent in human dentinal tubules:              Matthews D, Vig K, Zahrowski J. Lasers may reduce pain
        a pilot study. Odontology. 2011;99:45-48.                                arising from dentin hypersensitivity. JADA. 2014;145:e1-e2.
    20. Liu Y, Gao J, Gao Y, Xu S, Zhan X, Wu B. In Vitro Study of         38.   Romano AC, Aranha AC, da Silviera BL, Baldochi SL, de
        Dentin Hypersensitivity Treated by 980-nm Diode Laser. J                 Paula Eduardo C. Evaluation of carbon dioxide laser irradi-
        Lasers Med Sci. 2013;4:111-119.                                          ation associated with calcium hydroxide in the treatment of
    21. Lund RG, Silva AF, Piva E, Da Rosa WL, Heckmann SS, De-                  dentinal hypersensitivity. A preliminary study. Lasers Med
        marco FF. Clinical evaluation of two desensitizing treatments            Sci. 2011;26:35-42.


    Annali di Stomatologia 2015; VI (3-4): 75-80                                                                                              79
    R. Biagi et al.


    39. Ipci SD, Cakar G, Kuru B, Yilmaz S. Clinical evaluation of        45. He S, Wang Y, Li X, Hu D. Effectiveness of laser therapy and
        lasers and sodium fluoride gel in the treatment of dentine hy-        topical desensitizing agents in treating dentine hypersensi-
        persensitivity. Photomed Lasers Surg. 2009;27:85-91.                  tivity: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil. 2011;38:348-358.
    40. Genovesi A, Sachero E, Lorenzi C. Il ruolo dell’igienista den-    46. Blatz MB. Laser therapy may be better than topical desen-
        tale nel trattamento laser dell’ipersensibilità dentinale. Prev       sitizing agents for treating dentin hypersensitivity. J Evid Based




                                                                                                                         i
        & Ass Dent. 2010;36:32-35.                                            Dent Pract. 2012;12:229-230.




                                                                                                                       al
    41. Gholami GA, Fekrazed R, Esmaiel-Nejad A, Kalhori KA. An           47. Sgolastra F, Petrucci A, Severino M, Gatto R, Monaco A.
        evaluation of the occluding effects of Er,Cr:YSGG, Nd:YAG,            Lasers for the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity: a
        CO2 and diode lasers in dentinal tubules: a scanning elec-            meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2013;92:492-499.
        tron microscope in vitro study. Photomed Lasers Surg.             48. Blatz MB. Laser therapy may be better than topical desen-




                                                                                                                    on
        2011;29:115-121.                                                      sitizing agents for treating dental hypersensitivity. J Evid Based
    42. Belal MH, Yassin A. A comparative evaluation of CO2 and               Dent Pract. 2012;12:69-70.
        erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet laser therapy in the        49. Yilmaz HG, Cengiz E, Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S, Bayindir H, Aykac
        management of dentin hypersensitivity and assessment of               Y. Clinical evaluation of Er,Cr:YSGG and GaAIAs laser ther-
        mineral content. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2014;44:227-              apy for treating dentine hypersensitivity: a randomized




                                                                                                          zi
        234.                                                                  controlled clinical trial. J Dent. 2011;39:249-254.
    43. Cunha-Cruz J. Laser therapy for dentine hypersensitivity. Evid    50. Jokstad A. The effectiveness of laser to reduce dentinal hy-
        Based Dent. 2011;12:74-75.                                            persensitivity remains unclear. J Evid Based Dent Pract.




                                                                                         na
    44. Dilsiz A, Aydin T, Canakci V, Gungormus M. Clinical eval-             2011;11:178-179.
        uation of Er:YAG, Nd:YAG, and diode laser therapy for de-         51. Sgolastra F, Petrucci A, Severino M, Gatto R, Monaco A. Ef-
        sensitization of teeth with gingival recession. Photomed Laser        fectiveness of laser in dentinal hypersensitivity treatment:a
        Surg. 2010;28:S1-S7.                                                  systematic review. J Endod. 2011;37:297-303.




                                                                   t        er
                                                                In
                                                 ni
                                      io
                           iz
          Ed
IC
C
©




    80                                                                                          Annali di Stomatologia 2015; VI (3-4): 75-80
