Skip to content

Effectiveness of Bioactiveglass Air Abrasion Versus Fluoride Varnish in Management of Dentin Hypersensitivity

Effectiveness of Sylc Air Abrasion Bioactive Glass Technology Versus Fluoride Varnish Application in Management of Hypersensitivity of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions: Randomized Clinical Trial.

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 1
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03285360
Enrollment
50
Registered
2017-09-18
Start date
2017-10-01
Completion date
2019-01-01
Last updated
2019-01-31

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Hypersensitivity Dentin, Tooth Hypersensitivity

Keywords

Bifluoride, sylc, hypersensitivity,

Brief summary

Will the use of Bioactive glass with air abrasion technology (Sylc) compared to Fluoride Varnish (Biflourid 10) affects the degree of pain in patients complaining from hypersensitivity due to non-carious lesions?

Detailed description

* Population: Patients complaining from Dentin Hypersensitivity due to non-carious lesions. * Intervention: Sylc, Air Abrasion Bioactive glass (Denfotex Research Ltd.) * Comparison: BiFlourid 10, Fluoride Varnish (VOCO, Germany) * Outcome measures: Dentin Hypersensitivity Outcome name Measuring device Measuring unit Dentin Hypersensitivity * Thermal * Tactile * Evaporative

Interventions

COMBINATION_PRODUCTSylc

a dry powder (calcium sodium phosphosilicate), based on NovaMin powder. Bottle of small and coarse particles will be used for the treatment

COMBINATION_PRODUCTfluoride varnish (Bifluorid 10)

It is a rapid- drying suspension of equal amounts of sodium fluoride and calcium fluoride.

Sponsors

Cairo University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

double blinded

Intervention model description

Dentin Hypersensitivity

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Males or females. * Age: 18-70 years old. * Patients with good oral hygiene. * Co-operative patients who show interest to participate in the study.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with bad oral hygiene. * Patients with orthodontic appliances, or bridge work that might interfere with evaluation. * Patients who did any periodontal surgeries within the previous 6 months. * Patients who are allergic to any ingredients will be used in the study. * Pregnant and lactating women.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain due to dentin hypersensitivity (evaporative stimulus)2 minutes after treatmentPain arising from dentin hypersensitivity in non-carious lesions stimulated by air blast measured by a 10 cm visual analogue scale VAS

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain due to dentin hypersensitivity (evaporative stimulus)1 weekPain arising from dentin hypersensitivity in non-carious lesions stimulated by air blast measured by a 10 cm visual analogue scale VAS
Pain due to dentin hypersensitivity (tactile stimulus)2 minutes after treatmentPain arising from dentin hypersensitivity in non-carious lesions stimulated by tactile stimulation with a probe measured by a 10 cm visual analogue scale VAS
Pain due to dentin hypersensitivity (thermal stimulus)2 minutes after treatmentPain arising from dentin hypersensitivity in non-carious lesions stimulated by cold water measured by a 10 cm visual analogue scale VAS

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026