EFFECTIVENESS OF DENTIN ADHESIVE AND COPAL VARNISH IN PREVENTING POST-ORTHODONTIC DENTAL HYPERSENSITIVITY
Main Article Content
Keywords
Copal Varnish, Dentin Adhesive, Efficacy, Orthodontic Sensitivity, Post-Orthodontic Discomfort.
Abstract
Background: Post-orthodontic dental hypersensitivity is a common issue that patients often experience following orthodontic treatment. This discomfort is typically transient but can significantly impact patient satisfaction. Several materials, including dentin adhesives and copal varnish, have been proposed to mitigate this sensitivity, though their comparative efficacy remains uncertain.
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of dentin adhesive and copal varnish in reducing post-orthodontic sensitivity.
Study Design and Setting: A prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted at Operative Dentistry Department, Sharif Medical & Dental College, Lahore.
Methodology: A total of 130 patients were randomly assigned to two groups: Group A (dentin adhesive) and Group B (copal varnish), with 65 participants in each group. Sensitivity scores were recorded using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at baseline, one week, and one month post-treatment. Sensitivity reduction was evaluated at both time points, and efficacy was determined by the percentage of patients experiencing a reduction in sensitivity.
Results: Baseline sensitivity scores were comparable between both groups. After 1 week, 90.8% of Group A and 78.5% of Group B showed sensitivity reduction. After 1 month, 95.4% of Group A and 85.4% of Group B exhibited reduced sensitivity. Overall, 93.3% of Group A and 80.0% of Group B reported efficacy in reducing sensitivity. The differences between the two groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: Dentin adhesive was more effective than copal varnish in reducing post-orthodontic sensitivity, demonstrating higher efficacy and faster results.
References
2. Gizani S, Kloukos D, Papadimitriou A, Roumani T, Twetman S. Is bleaching effective in managing post-orthodontic white-spot lesions? A systematic review. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2020 Jan 1;18(1):1-0.
3. Shafiai NA, Mohamed AM. Dilemma of Orthodontic Treatment in Fluorosed/Hypomineralised Enamel Teeth: A Case Report. Journal of International Dental and Medical Research. 2020 May 1;13(2):719-26.
4. Bahar BS, Alkhalidy SR, Kaklamanos EG, Athanasiou AE. Do orthodontic patients develop more gingival recession in anterior teeth compared to untreated individuals? A systematic review of controlled studies. International orthodontics. 2020 Mar 1;18(1):1-9.
5. Nastri L, Nucci L, Carozza D, Martina S, Serino I, Perillo L, d’Apuzzo F, Grassia V. Gingival Recessions and Periodontal Status after Minimum 2-Year-Retention Post-Non-Extraction Orthodontic Treatment. Applied Sciences. 2022 Feb 4;12(3):1641.
6. Dillon M, Turner S, Vesey J, Harrison JE. Relevant Research from other Journals: Orthodontics and periodontics interface. Journal of Orthodontics. 2022 Dec;49(4):498-503.
7. Kaur N, Mushtaq M. Orthodontic treatment adverse effects: A comprehensive review. Journal of Advanced Medical and Dental Sciences Research. 2020 Oct 1;8(10):87-90.
8. Sfondrini MF, Pascadopoli M, Gallo S, Ricaldone F, Kramp DD, Valla M, Gandini P, Scribante A. Effect of enamel pretreatment with pastes presenting different relative dentin abrasivity (RDA) values on orthodontic bracket bonding efficacy of microfilled composite resin: in vitro investigation and randomized clinical trial. Materials. 2022 Jan 11;15(2):531.
9. Flynn LN, Julien K, Noureldin A, Buschang PH. The efficacy of fluoride varnish vs a filled resin sealant for preventing white spot lesions during orthodontic treatment: A randomized clinical trial. The Angle Orthodontist. 2022 Mar 1;92(2):204-12.
10. Sivakumar P. Advancements in technology in the field of orthodontics. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research. 2020 Feb 1;12(2):236-42.
11. Abdelhafez RS, Talib AA, Al‐Taani DS. The effect of orthodontic treatment on the periodontium and soft tissue esthetics in adult patients. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research. 2022 Feb;8(1):410-20.
12. Krishnan V, Renjithkumar A, Davidovitch ZE. Mechanical and biological determinants of iatrogenic injuries in orthodontics. Biological mechanisms of tooth movement. 2021 Apr 9:277-96.
13. Nicolay OF, Almaidhan A. Orthodontics for Esthetic Dental Treatment: Symbiotic Efforts for Optimal Results. Esthetic Oral Rehabilitation with Veneers: A Guide to Treatment Preparation and Clinical Concepts. 2020:27-66.
14. Ding YJ, Yao H, Wang GH, Song H. A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study of the efficacy of Clinpro XT varnish and Gluma dentin desensitizer on dentin hypersensitivity. American Journal of Dentistry. 2014 Apr 1;27(2):79-83.
15. Shabbir S, Ahmed S, Zaidi SJ, Riaz S, Sarwar H, Taqi M, Rahman Khan ZU. Efficacy of seventh generation bonding agents as desensitizers in patients with dentin hypersensitivity: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2022 May 14;24(1):562.
16. Rana NA, Akhtar Q. Dentin adhesive liner vs copal varnish for the prevention of postoperative sensitivity in amalgam restorations. Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal. 2019 Oct 23;69(5):1004-09.
17. Mushtaq F, Noor N, Manzoor MA, Anayat N. Application of fluoride varnish as non invasive treatment modality for dentinal hypersensitivity. Pak Oral Dent J 2019; 39(3):273-76.
18. Younus MZ, Ahmed MA, Syed AU, Baloch JM, Ali M, Sheikh A. Comparison between effectiveness of dentine desensitizer and one bottle self-etch adhesive on dentine hypersensitivity. Technology and Health Care. 2021 Jan 1;29(6):1153-9.
19. Saba K, Maxood A, Abdullah S, Riaz A. Comparison of frequency of post operative sensitivity in amalgam restorations using copal varnish and dentin adhesive liner. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2018; 30(2): 163–6.
20. Royse MC, Ott NW, Mathieu GP. Dentin adhesive superior to copal varnish in preventing microleakage in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2001; 18(7): 440-3.