CLINICAL EFFICACY OF TREATMENT OF DENTINE HYPERSENSITIVITY USING LOW LEVEL LASER THERAPY AND ETHANOLIC EXTRACT OF PROPOLIS IN PATIENTS WITH GENERALIZED PERIODONTITIS

Demydova P. I., Ryabokon E. M.

DENTISTRY

Scentific article

Particular attention today is attracted by dentine hypersensitivity that occurs in patients with periodontal tissue diseases. The severity of pain varies from mild to severe; this can negatively affect the psycho-emotional state of the patient and reduce his performance. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity in patients with generalized periodontitis of a chronic course using varnish based on sodium fluoride, ethanolic extract of propolis, low level laser therapy and the combined usage of low level laser therapy and ethanolic extract of propolis. Object and methods. 104 patients with dentine hypersensitivity and generalized chronic periodontitis were divided into 4 groups in accordance with the treatment method. In group 1 a varnish based on sodium fluoride was used, 2 – ethanolic extract of propolis, in 3 – low level laser therapy (wavelength 810 nm), in group 4, treatment was performed using the combined use of tincture of ethanolic extract of propolis and low level laser therapy (wavelength 810 nm). The severity of dentine hypersensitivity was evaluated using a visual analogue scale. The obtained values of indicators on a visual analogue scale were evaluated before treatment, immediately after treatment, in a week, 1 month, 3 months, six months and a year after treatment in each group. The patients of all groups were instructed not to rinse after applying of treatment, eat or drink for 30 minutes after the treatment and to avoid using any other desensitizing agent in the all period of the research. All the data were entered into Microsoft Excel sheet. The statistical significance of the results was evaluated in IBM SPSS Statistics, V. 25.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.). Values of p < 0.05 were accepted as statistically significant. Research results. 104 patients completed our study. Treatment in all four groups was effective immediately after receiving it, as evidenced by a significant decrease in the average values of sensitivity indicators on a visual analogue scale. The average values of the indicators on the visual analogue scale did not return to the values received for treatment in all four groups; a year later, the lowest values were obtained in group with combined treatment using ethanolic extract of propolis and diode laser (810 nm). Intergroup comparison results are statically significant (p <0.05). Conclusions. Thus, according to the analysis of the obtained results of sensitivity indicators on a visual analogue scale, the treatment regimen proposed by us, combined application of ethanolic extract of propolis with diode laser (810 nm) irradiation, has high clinical stability.

dentine hypersensitivity, periodontitis, propolis, diode laser.

1. Ivanytskyy IO, Nykolishyn AK. Giperchutlyvist zubiv. Suchasni poglyady na etiologiyu, patogenez ta likuvannya. Aktualni problemy suchasnoyi medytsyny. 2007;7(20):339-45. [in Ukrainian].
2. Splieth CH, Tachou A. Epidemiology of dentin hypersensitivity. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(1):3-8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00784-012-0889-8
3. Brännström M, Äström A. The hydrodynamics of the dentine; Its possible relationship to dentinal pain. Int Dent J. 1972;22:219-27.
4. West NX, Lussi A, Seong J, Hellwig E. Dentin hypersensitivity: Pain mechanisms and aetiology of exposed cervical dentin. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(1):9-19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0887-x
5. Yarova SP, Genzytska OS, Zabolotna II. Osoblyvosti likuvannya giperesteziyi dentynu pry zakhvoryuvannyakh tkanyn parodonta. Medytsyna sogodni i zavtra. 2011;3(52):143-6. [in Ukrainian].
6. Chen CL, Parolia A, Pau A, Celerino De Moraes Porto IC. Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of desensitizing agents in dentine tubule occlusion using scanning electron microscopy. Aust Dent J. 2015;60(1):65-72. DOI: 10.1111/adj.12275
7. Almas K, Mahmoud A, Dahlan A. A comparative study of propolis and saline application on human dentin. A SEM study. Indian J Dent Res. 2001;12:21-7.
8. Khurshid Z, Naseem M, Zafar MS, Najeeb S, Zohaib S. Propolis: a natural biomaterial for dental and oral healthcare. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2017;11(4):265-74. DOI: 10.15171/joddd.2017.046
9. Abbasi AJ, Mohammadi F, Bayat M, Gema SM, Ghadirian H, Seifi H, Bahrami N. Applications of Propolis in Dentistry: a review. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2018;28(4):505-12. DOI: 10.4314/ejhs.v28i4.16
10. Biagi R, Cossellu G, Sarcina M, Pizzamiglio IT, Farronato G, Cà Granda F. Laser-assisted treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity: a literature review. Ann Stomatol (Roma). 2016;6(3-4):75-80.
11. Benoist L, Niang F, Faye SO, Sarr B, Seck M. Treatment of Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials. J Dent Oral Care Med. 2016;2(2):204. DOI: 10.15744/2454
12. Zaytsev AV, Boychenko ON, Nikolishin AK. Ispolzovanie metodik opredeleniya chuvstvitelnosti zubov v issledovaniyakh po effektivnosti ustraneniya giperestezii tverdykh tkaney. Visnik problem biologiyi i meditsini. 2018;2.1(143):271-5. [in Russian].

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 3 (157), 2020 year, 322-326 pages, index UDK 616.314.17-008.1-036.12-009.611-085.32-085.849.19

10.29254/2077-4214-2020-3-157-322-326