이번 연구에서는 19명 환자의 40개 상아질 지각과민 치아를 조사하였다. 지각과민증을 평가하기 위하여 기계, 온도 및 전기적 자극을 사용하였다. 상아질 지각과민증의 치료제로는 Gluma(R) Desensitizer (Heraeus Kulzer GmbH & Co., Germany)를 사용 하였다. 연구 방법은 다음과 같다: 지각과민증의 치료 전에 협면의 치관$\frac{1}{3}$ 부위에서 전기치수검사를 시행하여 치수 생활력을 조사하였고, 그 측정치를 기록하였다. 그리고 기계 및 온도 자극을 이용한 검사를 시행하여 지각과민증의 유무를 확인하였다. 지각과민증이 존재함을 확인한 후에 지각과민증의 마모부에서 전기치수검사를 실시하였다. 치약을 전해질로 사용하였고 반응시의 숫자를 기록하였다. 이후 Gluma(R) Desensitizer를 이용하여 지각과민증을 치료하였다. 치료 후 마모 부위에서 기계, 온도 및 전기 검사를 다시 실시하고 그 결과를 기록하였다. 기계 및 온도 자극에 대해 40개 치아 모두에서 지각과민증 치료 전에는 반응을 보였으며 치료 후에는 반응을 보이지 않았다. 치관 $\frac{1}{3}$ 부위에서 전기치수검사를 실시하였을 때 모든 치아는 31에서 65 (48.9${\pm}$7.2)의 범위에서 반응하였다. 상아질 지각과민증의 치료 전에 전기치수검사를 실시하였을 때 34개의 치아는 2에서 반응하였고 나머지 6개의 치아는 17에서 25 범위에서 반응하였다. 치료 후에는 40개 치아 모두가 12에서 27 (19.6${\pm}$3.5)의 범위에서 반응하였다. 치료 전에 2보다 큰 숫자에서 반응을 보인 여섯개의 치아는 18에서 23의 범위에서 반응하였다. 이번 연구의 범위 내에서 다음과 같은 결론을 도출할 수 있다. 상아질 지각과민증을 보이는 치아가 기계 및 온도 자극에 반응을 보인다면 그 치아는 마모된 면에서 낮은 전기저항을 보인다. 반면 상아질 지각과민증을 치료하여 기계 및 온도 자극에 반응하지 않는다면 그 치아는 마모면에서 증가된 전기저항을 보인다. 전기치수검사는 상아질 지각과민의 진단에 활용될 수 있다. 나아가 전기치수검사는 상아질 지각과민증의 치료 결과를 평가하는 데 유용할 것이다. 하지만 전기치수검사는 상아질 지각과민을 측정하는 데에는 적절하지 못하다.
이번 연구에서는 19명 환자의 40개 상아질 지각과민 치아를 조사하였다. 지각과민증을 평가하기 위하여 기계, 온도 및 전기적 자극을 사용하였다. 상아질 지각과민증의 치료제로는 Gluma(R) Desensitizer (Heraeus Kulzer GmbH & Co., Germany)를 사용 하였다. 연구 방법은 다음과 같다: 지각과민증의 치료 전에 협면의 치관 $\frac{1}{3}$ 부위에서 전기치수검사를 시행하여 치수 생활력을 조사하였고, 그 측정치를 기록하였다. 그리고 기계 및 온도 자극을 이용한 검사를 시행하여 지각과민증의 유무를 확인하였다. 지각과민증이 존재함을 확인한 후에 지각과민증의 마모부에서 전기치수검사를 실시하였다. 치약을 전해질로 사용하였고 반응시의 숫자를 기록하였다. 이후 Gluma(R) Desensitizer를 이용하여 지각과민증을 치료하였다. 치료 후 마모 부위에서 기계, 온도 및 전기 검사를 다시 실시하고 그 결과를 기록하였다. 기계 및 온도 자극에 대해 40개 치아 모두에서 지각과민증 치료 전에는 반응을 보였으며 치료 후에는 반응을 보이지 않았다. 치관 $\frac{1}{3}$ 부위에서 전기치수검사를 실시하였을 때 모든 치아는 31에서 65 (48.9${\pm}$7.2)의 범위에서 반응하였다. 상아질 지각과민증의 치료 전에 전기치수검사를 실시하였을 때 34개의 치아는 2에서 반응하였고 나머지 6개의 치아는 17에서 25 범위에서 반응하였다. 치료 후에는 40개 치아 모두가 12에서 27 (19.6${\pm}$3.5)의 범위에서 반응하였다. 치료 전에 2보다 큰 숫자에서 반응을 보인 여섯개의 치아는 18에서 23의 범위에서 반응하였다. 이번 연구의 범위 내에서 다음과 같은 결론을 도출할 수 있다. 상아질 지각과민증을 보이는 치아가 기계 및 온도 자극에 반응을 보인다면 그 치아는 마모된 면에서 낮은 전기저항을 보인다. 반면 상아질 지각과민증을 치료하여 기계 및 온도 자극에 반응하지 않는다면 그 치아는 마모면에서 증가된 전기저항을 보인다. 전기치수검사는 상아질 지각과민의 진단에 활용될 수 있다. 나아가 전기치수검사는 상아질 지각과민증의 치료 결과를 평가하는 데 유용할 것이다. 하지만 전기치수검사는 상아질 지각과민을 측정하는 데에는 적절하지 못하다.
In this study, 40 hypersensitive teeth of 19 patients were investigated. The procedures performed were as follows: Before desensitization, EPT at occlusal third of buccal surface was done for the evaluation of pulp vitality and the EPT value was recorded for the reference value. And mechanical and t...
In this study, 40 hypersensitive teeth of 19 patients were investigated. The procedures performed were as follows: Before desensitization, EPT at occlusal third of buccal surface was done for the evaluation of pulp vitality and the EPT value was recorded for the reference value. And mechanical and thermal test was executed for the test of hypersensitivity. If the tooth responded to the above tests, we did EPT at the exposed surface, using toothpaste as a electrolite medium and recorded the EPT value at patient's response. After the tests had been done, desensitization procedures with Gluma(R) Desensitizer were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. After desensitization, the same tests except EPT at occlusal third were repeated. All the 40 teeth responded positive before desensitization and negative after desensitization procedures. The EPT value at occlusal third ranged from 31 to 65 (48.9${\pm}$7.2). Before desensitization 34 teeth responded at EPT value of 2 and the remaining 6 teeth was in the range of 17 to 25. After desensitization all 40 teeth responded from 12 to 27 (19.6${\pm}$3.5). The 6 teeth responded at greater number than 2 before desensitization was in the range of 18 to 23. Within the limitations of this study we can conclude that: When a tooth with dentinal hypersensitivity responds to mechanical and thermal stimulation, the tooth shows very low resistance to electricity at the exposed surface while when a tooth is desensitized and doesn't show respond to mechanical and thermal stimuli, the tooth shows increased level of resistance to electric stimulation at the exposed surface. EPT can be used for the diagnosis of dentinal hypersensitivity. Furthermore EPT will be useful to evaluate the outcome of desensitization procedures. However, EPT is not a valid tool for measuring dentinal hypersensitivity.
In this study, 40 hypersensitive teeth of 19 patients were investigated. The procedures performed were as follows: Before desensitization, EPT at occlusal third of buccal surface was done for the evaluation of pulp vitality and the EPT value was recorded for the reference value. And mechanical and thermal test was executed for the test of hypersensitivity. If the tooth responded to the above tests, we did EPT at the exposed surface, using toothpaste as a electrolite medium and recorded the EPT value at patient's response. After the tests had been done, desensitization procedures with Gluma(R) Desensitizer were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. After desensitization, the same tests except EPT at occlusal third were repeated. All the 40 teeth responded positive before desensitization and negative after desensitization procedures. The EPT value at occlusal third ranged from 31 to 65 (48.9${\pm}$7.2). Before desensitization 34 teeth responded at EPT value of 2 and the remaining 6 teeth was in the range of 17 to 25. After desensitization all 40 teeth responded from 12 to 27 (19.6${\pm}$3.5). The 6 teeth responded at greater number than 2 before desensitization was in the range of 18 to 23. Within the limitations of this study we can conclude that: When a tooth with dentinal hypersensitivity responds to mechanical and thermal stimulation, the tooth shows very low resistance to electricity at the exposed surface while when a tooth is desensitized and doesn't show respond to mechanical and thermal stimuli, the tooth shows increased level of resistance to electric stimulation at the exposed surface. EPT can be used for the diagnosis of dentinal hypersensitivity. Furthermore EPT will be useful to evaluate the outcome of desensitization procedures. However, EPT is not a valid tool for measuring dentinal hypersensitivity.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
문제 정의
This study primarily intended to investigate if there was any difference between the EPT values at exposed dentine surface before desensitization and after desensitization. To screen the hypersensitive dentine surface, we used mechanical (or tactile) and thermal (and/or evaporative) stimuli.
제안 방법
EPT value was recorded for the reference value. And mechanical and thermal test was executed for the test of hypersensitivity. If the tooth responded to the above tests, we did EPT at the exposed surface, using toothpaste as a electrolite medium and recorded the EPT value at patient's response.
And mechanical and thermal test was executed for the test of hypersensitivity. If the tooth responded to the above tests, we did EPT at the exposed surface, using toothpaste as a electrolite medium and recorded the EPT value at patient's response.
Furthermore, it is widely agreed that the value of electric stimulation for dentin sensitivity testing remains controversial10 and perhaps better suited for measuring pulpal vitality than dentin hypersensi- tivity11. In this study we tried to investigate if there was any difference between the EPT values before desensitization and after desensitization at exposed dentine surface and to evaluate the capability of EPT as a measuring tool for dentinal hypersensitivity.
The procedures performed were as follows: Before desensitization, EPT at occlusal third of buccal surface was done for the evaluation of pulp vitality and the EPT value was recorded for the reference value. And mechanical and thermal test was executed for the test of hypersensitivity.
For the mechanical test the exposed tooth surface was scratched using periodontal probe tip. The thermal method was to blow room-temperature air from a dental syringe for 1s over a hypersensitive surface at right angle and about 5 mm away from the exposed surface. The evaluation of response to mechanical and thermal stimulations was positive or negative in which positive means presence of the symptom of dentinal hypersensitivity while negative means absence of symptom of dentinal hypersensitivity.
대상 데이터
40 hypersensitive teeth of 19 patients were investigated. The subjects consisted of 12 males and 7 females.
6 years. The 40 teeth consisted of 29 maxillary premolars and 11 maxillary first molars. The hypersensitive tooth should present cervical abrasion lesion and be free of caries or restorations.
40 hypersensitive teeth of 19 patients were investigated. The subjects consisted of 12 males and 7 females. They aged 23 - 45 years and their mean age was 25.
성능/효과
desensitization. Although the sample size of this study is small, the proportion of 85% is thought to be large enough to conclude that EPT can be used for a diagnostic tool of dentinal hypersensitivity. Furthermore those 34 teeth showed great increase (minimum difference of 10 unit numbers) in EPT measurements after desensitization, so EPT can be also applicable to evaluating the outcome of desensitization procedures.
참고문헌 (18)
Kleinberg I, Kaufman HW and Wolff M. Measurement of tooth hypersensitivity and oral factors involved in its development. Archs oral biol 1994;39:63s-71s
Absi EG, Addy M and Adams D. Dentine hypersensitivity. A study of the patency of dentinal tubules in sensitive and non-sensitive cervical dentine. J Clin Periodontol 1987;14: 280-284
Walline B, Wagner J, Marx D and Reinhardt R. Comparison of methods for measuring root and mucogingival sensitivity. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;90: 641-646
Holland GR, Narhi MN, Addy M, Gangarosa L and Orchardson R. Guidelines for the design and conduct of clinical trials on dentine hypersensitivity. J Clin Periodontol 1997;24:808-813
Orro M, Truong T, DeVizio W, Miller S, Chu T-C and Boylan D. Thermodontic stimulator-a new technology for assessment of thermal dentinal hypersensitivity. J Clin Dent 1994;5: 83-86
Clark G and Troullos E. Designing hypersensitivity clinical studies. Dent Clinics N Am 1990;34:531-544
Orchardson R and Collins WJN. Thresholds of hypersensitive teeth to two forms of controlled stimulation. J Clin Periodontol 1987;14:68-73
Dondi Dall'orologio G, Borghetti R, Caliceti C, Lorenzi R and Malferrari S. Clinical evaluation of gluma and gluma 200 for treatment of hyper- sensitive dentine. Archs oral Biol 1994;39:126s
Felton DA, Bergenholtz G and Kanoy E. Evaluation of the desensitizing effect of Gluma Dentin Bond on teeth prepared for complete-coverage restorations. Int J Prosthodont 1991;4:292-298
Dummer PMH and Tanner M. The response of caries-free, unfilled teeth to electrical excitation: a comparison of two new pulp testers. Int Endod J 1986;19:172-177
Absi EG, Addy M and Adams D. Dentine hypersensitivity: the develop- ment and evaluation of a replica technique to study sensitive and non-sensitive cervical dentine. J Clin Periodontol 1989;16:190-195
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.