RESUMO
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of cyanoacrylate to other treatments or placebo in the management of dentin hypersensitivity (DH). Materials and Methods: The present review was organized based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The search aimed to answer the following question: is cyanoacrylate effective in the treatment of DH when compared to other treatments or placebo? The following databases were used: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, BVS, Web of Science, Cochrane, Clinicaltrials.gov, Portal Periódicos Capes, Google Scholar, and manual search. The evaluation process started with the information collected from the selected articles according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT). Results: Two randomized and five nonrandomized clinical trials were analyzed in the qualitative synthesis. The studies presented different cyanoacrylate formulations, different scales for evaluating pain, and different methods for provoking a painful stimulus. Cyanoacrylate-based products reduce DH in shorter follow-up periods and this reduction persisted throughout the study. The results varied according to the methods used to stimulate the pain. Only two articles showed a low risk of bias and a high level of scientific evidence. Conclusion: Although there is a limited number of studies in the scientific literature with appropriate methodological quality, the available evidence proves the effectiveness of cyanoacrylate in the treatment of DH. Clinical Relevance. Cyanoacrylate is easy to access, effective, easily applicable, and a low-cost product with satisfactory results.
RESUMO
ABSTRACT: Orthodontic accessories bonding in tooth enamel has been a critical step since the introduction of direct bonding techniques due to the importance of bracket stability. The aim of this study was to evaluate adhesion strength of different adhesive systems used for bracket bonding on dental surface. The present in vitro study was made from the analysis of shear strength of steel and ceramic brackets bonding with six different types of orthodontic adhesives. The brackets were bonded to 120 human extracted first premolar teeth with Orthocem®, Orthocem® + Ambar Universal® primer, Orthobond Plus®, Biofix®, Transbond XT®, Ortholink VLC®. Shear strength tests were performed on a universal testing machine EZ-Test-Shimadzu® and the data were analyzed using ANOVA test with Post-Hoc Bonferroni and 95 % statistical significance (p <0.05). Transbond XT® and Ortholink VLC® resin values showed greater shear resistance for steel brackets bonding and Transbond XT® and Orthobond Plus® adhesives showed better adhesion results for ceramic brackets bonding.
RESUMEN: La unión de accesorios de ortodoncia en el esmalte dental ha sido un paso crítico desde la introducción de las técnicas de unión directa debido a la importancia de la estabilidad del soporte. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la fuerza de adhesión de diferentes sistemas adhesivos utilizados para la unión de brackets en la superficie dental. El presente estudio in vitro se realizó a partir del análisis de la resistencia al corte de brackets de acero y de cerámica unidos con seis tipos diferentes de adhesivos de ortodoncia. Los brackets se unieron a 120 primeros premolares extraídos con los adhesivos Orthocem®, Orthocem® + Ambar Universal® primer, Orthobond Plus®, Biofix®, Transbond XT®, Ortholink VLC®. Las pruebas de resistencia al corte se realizaron en una máquina de prueba universal EZ-Test-Shimadzu® y los datos se analizaron usando la prueba ANOVA con Bonferroni Post-Hoc y 95 % de significación estadística (p <0,05). Los valores de resina Transbond XT® y Ortholink VLC® mostraron una mayor resistencia al corte para la unión de brackets de acero y los adhesivos Transbond XT® y Orthobond Plus® mostraron mejores resultados de adhesión para la unión de brackets cerámicos.
