DocumentsDate added
Original research article:-Orthodontics
Prabhuraj Kambalyal 1 , Ronak Maniar 2*, Sudhanshu Sanadhya 3,Ramesh Nagarajappa4 & Prashant Nahar 5, & Mrudula Tak 6
1Professor,2Postgraduate student, Department of orthodontics,3Postgraduate student,4Head,6Senior lecturer, Department of community Dentistry, 5Professor,Department of oral medicine and radiology, Pacific Dental College and Hospital, Airport Road, Debari, Udaipur – 313024, Rajasthan.
Abstract:-
Aims: To assess the skeletal age of an individual by interpretation of the cervical vertebrae as seen in lateral cephalogram obtained as a standard pre-treatment diagnostic record and to correlate and evaluate the changes in the shape and size of the cervical vertebrae with the skeletal maturity index on a hand wrist radiograph. Settings and design: A cross sectional radiographic study was carried out among 120, 8-14 years old children visiting Department of Orthodontics, Pacific Dental College and Hospital, Udaipur, India. Methods and Material: The hand wrist x-ray and lateral cephalogram were taken and traced for all subjects. The system developed by Fishman and Farman and Hassel modification of Lamparski’s criteria was used to determine skeletal maturation by hand wrist evaluation and cervical vertebrae respectively. Statistical analysis used: Descriptive statistics and percentage of similar assessments were calculated. Chi square, One way ANOVA and Spearman’s correlation tests were applied. Statistical significance was set at p≤0.05. Results: Mean age of the study population was 11.5 ± 1.715 years. With increase in age, the proportion of children with higher CVMI and SMI scores also increased significantly. Significantly greater proportion of females had higher CVMI and SMI scores than males. Positive correlation (r=0.935) between CVMI and SMI scores was observed. The overall percentage correlation was found to be 93.3%. Conclusion: The results of the present study validate the use of cervical vertebrae as a growth marker and authenticate its use as a reliable method for skeletal maturation assessment.
Key words:- Cervical Vertebrae Maturation Indicator, Hand wrist radiograph, lateral cephalogram, Skeletal Maturation Indicator.
References:-
1.Hassel B, Farman AG. Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;107:58-66.
2.Hagg U, Taranger J. Maturation indicators and the pubertal growth spurt. Am J Orthod 1982;82:299-309.
3.Fishman LS. Radiographic evaluation of skeletal maturation. A clinically oriented method based on hand-wrist films. Angle Orthod 1982;52:88-112.
4.Kader HMA. The reliability of the dental X-ray film in assessment of the MP3 stages of the pubertal growth spurt. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114:427-9.
5.Fishman LS. Maturation patterns and prediction during adolescent. Angle Orthod 1987;57:178-93.
6.Joshi VV, Iyengar AR, Nagesh KS, Gupta J. Comparative study between cervical vertebrae and hand-wrist maturation for the assessment of skeletal age. Rev Clín Pesq Odontol 2010;6:207-13.
7.Fishman LS. Chronological versus skeletal Age, an evaluation of Craniofacial Growth. Angle Orthod 1979;49:181-9.
8.Sierra AM. Assessment of dental and skeletal maturity: A new approach. Angle Orthod 1987;57:194-208.
9.Bjork A, Helm S. Prediction of age of maximum puberty growth in body height. Angle Orthod 1967;37:134-43.
10.Stiehl J, Müller B, Dibbets J. The Development of the Cervical Vertebrae as an Indicator of Skeletal Maturity: Comparison with the Classic Method of Hand-wrist Radiograph. J Orofac Orthop 2009;70:327-35.
11.Hunter CJ. The correlation of facial growth with body height and skeletal maturation at adolescence. Angle Orthod 1966;36:44-54.
12.Gabriel DB, Southard KA, Qian F, Marshall SD, Franciscus RG, Southard TE. Cervical vertebrae maturation method: Poor Reproducibility. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:478-80.
13.Garcia FP, Torre H, Flores LI, Rea. The cervical vertebrae as maturational indicators. J Clin orthod 1998;32:221-5.
14.Kucukkelea N, Acer A, Biren S, Arun T. Comparison between cervical vertebrae and hand-wrist maturation for the assessment of skeletal maturity. J Pediatr 1999;24:47-52.
15.Baccetti T, Lorenzo F, McNamara JA. An improved version of cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of mandibular growth. Angle Orthod 2002;72:316-23.
16.Santiago RC, de Miranda Costa LF, Vitral RW, Fraga MR, Bolognese AM, Maia LC. Cervical vertebral maturation as a biologic indicator of skeletal maturity. Angle Orthod 2012;82:1123-31.
17.Lai EH, Liu JP, Chang JZ, Tsai SJ, Yao CC, Chen MH, et al. Radiographic assessment of skeletal maturation stages for orthodontic patients: hand-wrist bones or cervical vertebrae? J Formos Med Assoc 2008;107:316-25.
18.Mahajan S. Evaluation of skeletal maturation by comparing the hand wrist radiograph and cervical vertebrae as seen in lateral cephalogram. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22:309-16.
19.Chang HP, Liao CH, Yang YH, Chang HF, Chen KC. Correlation of cervical vertebra maturation with hand-wrist maturation in children. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2001;17:29-35.
20.Roman PS, Palma JC, Oteo D, Nevado E. Skeletal maturation determined by cervical vertebrae development. Eur J Orthod 2002;24:303-11.
21.Caltabiano M, Leonardi R, Zaborra G. Valutazione delle vertebre cervicali per la determinazione dell’eta scheletrica. Rivista Italiana di Odontoiatria Infantile 1990;1:15-20.
Copyright © 2013 Maniar Ronak et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Original article:- Anaesthesia
Ranganathan.S1*, Saravanan D1, Hari Kumar S1 & Sumathi.K2.
1Department of Anaesthesia. 2Department of Biochemistry, Sree Balaji Medical College and Hospital, Chennai (Bharath University),India.
Abstract:- Background: A prospective comparative study was done on lignocaine versus lignocaine with fentanyl to observe the effect on cardiovascular response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Materials & Methods: One hundred such elective surgical patients of active age group (16 -60 years) having American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status I & II irrespective of surgical procedure were randomly assigned to one of the two groups of 50 each. Group I received injection lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg intravenously 2 minutes before induction of general anesthesia. Patients in group II received injection fentanyl2 mcg/kg body weight and injection lignocaine 1 mg/kg body weight intravenously 2 minutes before induction of general anesthesia. Hemodynamic parameter i.e. blood pressures (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and mean blood pressure), heart rate, were monitored after intubation,5min,10 minutes following intubation. Results: There were statistically significant (p<0.001) increase in blood pressures, heart rate and rate pressure product in group I i.e. pretreatment with 1.5 mg/kg body weight intravenous lignocaine and remained so after 10 minutes. On the other hand there were no statistically significant (p>0.05) increase in heart rate, blood pressures and in group II, where pretreatment done with fentanyl 2 mcg/kg body weight with lignocaine 1 mg/kg body weight and the values returned control level before 5 minutes. Conclusion: The study showed that fentanyl 2 mcg/kg body weight with lignocaine 1 mg/kg body weight pretreatment suppresses the cardiovascular response due to laryngoscopy and intubation.
Keywords:- Endotracheal intubation, laryngoscopy, lignocaine ,fentanyl.
References:-
1.Black TE, Kay B and Henly TEJ. Reducing the hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and intubation. A comparison of alfentanyl with fentanyl. Anaesthesia 1984; 39: 883.
2.You Mi Ki Y, Kim NS, Lim SH, Kong MH, Kim HZ. The Effect of Lidocaine Spray before Endotracheal Intubation on the Incidence of Cough and Hemodynamic during Emergence in Children. Korean J Anesthesiology 2007 November; 53(3): S1-S6.
3.Shribman AJ, Smith G, Achola KJ. Cardiovscular and catecholmine response to laryngoscopy with and without tracheal intubation. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1986; 59:295-9.
4.Abou– madi M, Kesler H and Yacoub O. Cardiovascular reaction to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation following small and large intravenous dose of Lignocaine. Canadian anaesthesia society J. 1977; 24:12.
5.Gupta A, Wakhloo R, Gupta V, Mehta A, Kapoor BB. Comparison of Esmolol and Lignocaine for Attenuation of Cardiovascular Stress response to Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation. JK Science 2009 April -June; 11 (2): 78-81.
6.Devault M, Greifenstein FE, and Harris LC. Circulatory responses to endotracheal intubation in light general anaesthesia – the effect of Atropine and phentolamine. Anasthesiology 1960; 21: 360-2.
7.Samaha T, Ravussin P, Claquin C, Ecoffey C. Prevention of increase blood pressure and intracanial pressure during endotracheal intubation in neurosurgery and sure during endotracheal intubation in neurosurgery and surgery. esmolol verus lodocaine. Ann Fr Anaesthesia 1996; 15 (1) : 36-40.
8.Jorgemsen BC, Hoilund-Carlsen PF, Marving J, Christensen V. Lack of effect of intravenous lidocaine on hemodynamic responses to rapid sequence induction of general anesthesia. A double blind controlled clinical trial. Anesth Analg 1986; 65: 1037-41.
9.Harbhej Singh, , Phongthara Vichitvejpaisal, George Y. Gaines& Paul F. White.. Comparative Effects of Lidocaine, Esmolol, and Nitroglycerin in Modifying the Hemodynamic Response to Laryngoscopy and Intubation .Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. 1995;7:5-S.
10.Kobayashi TL, Watanabe K, Ito T. Lack of effect of I.V. lignocaine on cardiovascular responses to laryngoscopy and intubation. Masui 1995; 44 (4): 579-82.
Copyright © 2013 Ranganathan S et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Research article:- Microbiology
M.Bharathi1*,G.Naga Sugeetha2 & I.Jyothi Padmaja3.
1Assistant Professor, 3Professor, Department of Microbiology, 2Tutor, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam, AP-530002. India.
Abstract: Background: Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is a polymicrobial condition in which normal vaginal flora is replaced by Gardnerella vaginalis and other anaerobic bacteria. In pregnancy BV is associated with increased risk of preterm labor, preterm birth, premature rupture of membranes and other adverse fetal outcomes. Aim: 1. To compare Nugent’s criteria and Amsel’s criteria in the diagnosis of BV. 2. To know whether BV is a risk factor for Preterm delivery. 3. To know the relation between BV and low birth weight. Material & Methods: 60 pregnant women who were in preterm labor with cervical effacement more than 3cm and 60 pregnant women at term labor were included as study and control groups respectively. Swabs were collected from posterior vaginal fornix and BV was diagnosed by Amsel’s and Nugent’s criteria. Statistical Analysis: Standard error of difference between proportions. Results: 37 and 35 pregnant women were nullipara in study and control group respectively. Among study group 37 were below 34wks of gestation (61.6%). BV was diagnosed in 26 and 10 pregnant women by Nugent’s criteria and in 22 and 8 by Amsel’s criteria in study and control group respectively with significant P value ( < 0.05). Babies of low birth weight were born to 55 of pregnant women in study group irrespective of whether they were positive or negative for BV. Conclusions: Nugent’s criteria is superior to Amsel’s criteria in the diagnosis of BV. Bacterial Vaginosis in pregnancy is associated with greater than two fold increased risk of preterm birth and it is not directly related to delivery of low birth weight babies.
Key words: Preterm birth, Nugent’s criteria, Gardnerella vaginalis, Anaerobic bacteria, Adverse fetal outcome.
References:
1. Sharoon L Hillier, Robert P Nugent, David A Easchenbach, Marijane A Krohn et al. “Association between Bacterial vaginosis and Preterm Delivery of a Low birth weight infant” The New England Journal of Medicine 1995 December 28; 333: 1737-42.
2. Indu Latha, Yashodhara Pradeep, Sujatha and Amita Jain “ Estimation of the Incidence of Bacterial Vaginosis and other vaginal Infections and its consequences on maternal / fetal outcome in pregnant women attending an antenatal clinic in a tertiary care hospital in North India” Indian Journal of Community Medicine 2010; 35 (2): 285-93.
3. Renu Goyal, Poonam Sharma, Iqbal Kour, Neera Aggarwal and Vibha Talwar “ Diagnosis of Bacterial Vaginosis in Women in Labour” JK Science 2005 ; 7(1), Jan- March: 1-4.
4. Kumar Aruna, Khare Jyoti “Role of Bacterial Vaginosis in Preterm Labor”, J Obstet Gynecol India 2007 Sept/Oct; 57 (5): 413-6.
5. Vida Modares Nejad, Shahla Shafaie” the Association of Bacterial Vaginosis & Preterm Labour” Journal of Pakistan Medical Association 2008;58(3):104-6.
6. Deborah B.Nelson and George Macones “Bacterial Vaginosis in Pregnancy: Current findings and Future Directions” Epidemiologic Reviews 2002; 24 (2) :102-8.
7. Amsel R, Totten PA, Spiegel CA, Chen KC, Eschenbach D, Holmes KK “ Non specific Vaginitis: Diagnostic Criteria and Microbial and Epidemiological Associations” Am J Med 1983;74:14-22.
8. Koneman’s color Atlas and Text book of Diagnostic Microbiology, 6th ed. 2006, Washington C. Winn Jr.,MD,MBA, Stephen D. Allen MD , Willium M.Janda,PhD, D(ABMM), Elmer W. Koneman MD, Gary W. Procop,MD,MS, Paul C. Schreckenberger PhD, D(ABMM), Gail L. Woods,MD; publisher Lipponcott William & Wilkins, pp 835-6.
9. Mackie & Mc Cartney “ Practical Medical Microbiology” , Edited by J Gerald Collee, Andrew G. Fraser, Barrie P. Marmion, Anthony Simmons; Published by Churchill Livingstone, 14th ed, 2008 pp 456-8.
10. Bailey & Scott’s Diagnostic Microbiology, 12th ed. Betty A. Forbes, Daniel F.Sahn, Alice S. Weissfeld; Published by Mosby Elsevier 2007, pp 860-7 & 871.
11. Goyal R, Sharma P, Kaur I, Aggarwal N, and Talwar V “Bacterial Vaginosis and Vaginal Anaerobes In preterm Labour” J Indian Medical Association, 2004; 102 (10): 548- 53.
12. E Holst, AR Goffeng, and B Andersch “ Bacterial Vaginosis and Vaginal Microorganisms in idiopathic Premature Labor and Association with Pregnancy outcome” Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1994; January, 32 (1): 176-86.
13. Azam Azargoon, Shohreh Darvishzadeh “ Association of Bacterial Vaginosis, Trichomonas vaginalis and Vaginal acidity with outcome of pregnancy” Arch Iranian Med 2006;9(3):213-7. 14. Saifon Chawanpaiboon, Kanjana Pimol BN “ Bacterial Vaginosis in Threatened Preterm, Preterm and Term Labor” J Med Assoc Thai 2010; 93 (12):1351-5.
15. Beverly E Sha, Hva Y Chen, Qiong J Wang, M Reza Zariffard, Mardge H Cohen, Gregory T Spear “ Utility of Amsel Criteria, Nugent score and quantitative PCR for Gardnerella vaginalis, Mycoplasma hominis, and Lactobacillus spp. for Diagnosis of Bacterial Vaginosis in Human Immuno Deficiency women” J of Clin Microbiol, September 2005;43(9):4607-12.
16. Kantida Chaijareenont, Korakot Sirimai, Dittakarn Boriboonhirunsarn, Orawan Kiriwat “ Accuracy of Nugent’s score and Each Amsel’s Criteria in the Diagnosis of Bacterial Vaginosis” J Med Assoc. Thai 2004;87(11): 1270-4.
17. Desai Veena A, Verma Ragini and Manu Pawan Preet “Bacterial Vaginosis in patients with idiopathic Preterm Labor”, J Obstet Gynecol India, 2009, 59 (1): 53-7.
18. J Christopher Carey, Mark A Klebanoff, John C Hauth, Sharon L Hillier, Elizabeth A Thom et al “Metronidazole to prevent Preterm delivery in Pregnant women with Asymptamatic Bacterial Vaginosis” N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 534-40.
19. Pippa Oakeshott, Salley Kerry, Sima Hay and Phillip Hay “Bacterial Vaginosis and Preterm birth: A prospective Community- based Cohort study” British Journal of General Practice Feb 2004; 54:119- 22.
Copyright © 2013 M.Bharathi,G.Naga Sugeetha & I.Jyothi Padmaja. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Review article:-Pedodontics
Prashant Babaji1*, Nitin Sharma2, Rohit Sharma6,Subhash Chander4, Shivaprakash S3 & Jagadeesh G5.
1Associate Professor,2Senior Lecturer, Department of Pedodontics,4Senior Lecturer, Department of Conservative & Endodontics, Senior Lecturer, Department of Oral Pathology, Vyas Dental College, Jodhpur, India. 3Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Malbar Dental College, Manoor, Kerala, India. 5Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, VPDC Dental College, Sangli, Maharastra, India.
Abstract:- Teeth present at the time of birth are called Natal teeth. Teeth which erupt in the neonatal period that is within thirty days of birth are Neonatal teeth. Presence of natal tooth may results into several complications like difficulty in breast feeding, sublingual ulceration or risk of aspiration of mobile tooth. Hence the purpose of the present paper is to report an unusual case of natal tooth and to discuss its clinical features, complications and management.
Key words:- Clinical features, complications, natal tooth, Riga Fédé syndrome, syndromes, talon like structure.
References:-
1.Alexander K.C. Leung, William Lane M. Robson. Natal Teeth: A Review. Journal of the national medical association 2006; 98 (2):226-8.
2.Kumar A, Grewal H, Verma M. Posterior neonatl teeth. J Indian Soc Ped Prev Dent. 2011;1(29):68-70.
3.Massler M, Savara BS. Natal and neonatal teeth; a review of 24 cases reported in the literature. J Pediatr. 1950; 36(3):349-59.
4.Kates GA, Needleman HL, Holmes LB. Natal and neonatal teeth: a clinical study. JADA 1984, 109: 441–3.
5.Anegundi RT, Sudha P, Kaveri H, Sadanand K. Natal and neonatal teeth: a report of 4 cases. J Indian Soc Pedo Prev Dent 2002;20(3): 86–92.
6.Rao RS, Mathad SV. Natal teeth: Case report and review of literature. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 2009; 13:41-6.
7.Portela MB, Damasceno L, Primo LG. Unusual case of multiple natal teeth. J o Clin Pediatr Dent 2004; 29(1): 37-40.
8.Kamboj M, Cougule R. Neonatal Tooth—How Dangerous Can it Be? The J Clin Pediatr Dent 2009; 34(1): 59-60.
9.Sogi S, Hugar SM, Patil S, Kumar S. Multiple natal teeth: A rare case report. IJDR. 2011;22(1):169-71. 10.Bodenoff J, Gorlin RJ. Natal and neonatal teeth. Folklore and fact. Pediatrics 1963, 1087–93.
11.Spouge JD, Feasby WH. Erupted teeth in new born. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1966, 22: 198–208.
12.Rao BB, Mamatha GR, Jameera KM, Hegde RB. Natal and neonatal teeth: A case report. J Indian Soc Pedo Prev Dent 2001; 19:110-2.
13.Limos LV and Shintome LK. Natal and Neonatal teeth. Einstein. 2009; 7(1):112-3.
14.Singh S, Subbba Reddy VV, Dhananjaya G, Patil R. Reactive fibrous hyperplasia associated with a natal tooth: A case report. J Indian Soc Pedo Prev Dent 2004; 22:183-6.
15.McDonald RD, Avery DR, Dean JA. Dentistry for the Child and Adolescent. In: Eruption of the teeth. 8th edition. Mosby publications.2005 pp183-84.
16.Alvarez MP, Crespi PV, Shanske AL. Natal molars in Pfeiffer syndrome type 3: A case report. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1993; 18:21-4.
17.Darwish S, Sastry RH, Ruprecht A. Natal teeth, bifid tongue and deaf mutism. J Oral Med 1987; 42:49-53.
18.Uzamis M, Olmez S, Ozturk H, Celik H. Clinical and ultrastructural study of natal and neonatal teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1999; 23:173-7.
19.Masatomi Y, Abe K, Ooshima T. Unusual multiple natal teeth: case report. Pediatr Dent 1991; 13: 170-2.
0.Goho C. Neonatal sublingual traumatic ulceration (Riga-Fede disease): reports of cases. J Dent Child 1996; 63: 362–4.
21.Groeneveld X, Damme VP. Natal teeth inperspective: Literature review and report of two cases. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd 1993; 100(2): 49-51.
Copyright © 2013 Prashant Babaji et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
An Informed view:- Periodontology
Kamath Deepa G1*& Nayak Sangeeta U2
1Additional Professor, 2Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences ,Mangalore, Manipal University, India.
Abstract:- Dentinal hypersensitivity is characterized by a short, sharp pain in response to various stimuli. It is more commonly seen in adults in the 20- to 40-year-oldage group, has several etiological factors. Gingival recession and enamel loss both contribute to the prevalence of this condition, resulting in the exposure of dentin. Dentinal hypersensitivity is believed to occur due to the movement of fluid within the dentinal tubules occuring in response to thermal, chemical, tactile and evaporative stimuli, in accordance with Brännström’s Hydrodynamic Theory. Treatment options include in-office procedures and home use, self-applied products that are aimed at either occluding he dentinal tubules or preventing neural transmission and there by blocking the pain response.
Key words:- Dentinal Hypersensitivity, Recession, Pain, Potassium nitrate.
References:- 1.Addy M, Urquart E.: Dentine hypersensitivity: its prevalence, aetiology and clinical management. Dental Update 1992; 19: 407-12.
2.Walter AP: Dentine hypersensitivity: A review. J Contemp Dent Practice 2005;6:2:1-10
3.Chabanski MB, Gillam DG :Aetiology, prevalence and clinical features of cervical dentinesensitivity. J Oral Rehabil 1997; 24, 15-9.
4.Gillam DG, Orchardson R. Advances in the treatment of root dentin sensitivity: mechanismsand treatment principles. Endod Topics 2006; 13, 13-33.
5.Isabel C. C. M. Port, Ana K. M. Andrade and Marcos A. J. R. Montes:Journal of Oral Science, 2009; 51( 3), 323-32.
6.Orchardson R, Gillam DG. Managing dentinhypersensitivity. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137, 990-8.
7.Addy M.: Etiology and clinical implications of dentine hypersensitivity. Dent Clin No Amer 1990;34:503-14.
8. Scherman A, Jacobsen PL. Managing dentin hypersensitivity: what treatment to recommend to patients. J Am Dent Assoc 1992; 123:57-61.
9. Jacobsen PL, Bruce G. Clinical dentin hypersensitivity: understanding the causes and prescribing a t reatment. J. Contemporary Dent Practice 2001;2(1):1-8.
10. Canadian Advisory Board on Dentin Hypersensitivity: Consensus-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of dentin hypersensitivity. J Can Dent Assoc 2003;69(4): 221-6.
11.Poulsen S, Errboe M, Hovgaard O, et al. Potassium nitrate toothpaste for dentine hypersensitivity(Review). The Cochrane Collaboration 2004, Issue 4, Wiley Publisher .1-11.
12. Nagata T, Ishida H, Shinohara H, et al. Clinical evaluation of a potassium nitrate dentifrice for thetreatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. J Clin Peridontol 1994;21 (3):217-21.
13. Schiff T, Dotson M, Cohen S, et al. Efficacy of a dentifrice containing potassium nitrate, soluble pyrophosphate, PVM/MA copolymer, and sodium fluoride on dentinal hypersensitivity: a twelve-week clinical study. J Clin Dent 1994;5 Spec No: 87-92.
14. Silverman G. The sensitivity reducing effect of brushing with a potassium nitrate-sodium monofluorophosphate dentifrice. CompendContinEduc Dent 1985;6(2):z131-3.
15. Schiff T, Santos MD, Laffi S, et al. Efficacy of a dentifrice containing 5% potassium nitrate and1500 ppm sodium monofluorphosphate in a precipitated calcium carbonate base on dentinal hypersensitivity. J Clin Dent 1998;9(1):22-5.
16.Orchardson R, Gillam DG. The efficacy of potassium salts as agents for treating dentin hypersensitivity. J of Orofacial Pain 2000;14:9-19.
17.Thrash WJ, Dodds WJ, Jones DL. The effect of stannous fluoride on dentinal hypersensitivity.International Dent J 1994;44:107-18. Suppl 1.
18.Suge T, Kawasaki A, Ishikawa K, Matsuo T, Ebisu S. Effect of ammonium hexafluorosilicate ondentin tubule occlusion for the treatment of dentinhypersensitivity. Am J Dent 2006; 19, 248-52.
19.Kern DA, McQuade MJ, Scheidt MJ, Hanson B, VanDyke TE. Effectiveness of sodium fluoride on tooth hypersensitivity with and without iontophoresis. J Periodontol 1989; 60:386-9.
20.Mahmoud AS, Almas K, Dahlan AA. The effect of propolis on dentinal hypersensitivity andlevel of satisfaction among patients from a universityhospital Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Indian J Dent Res 1999;10: 130-7.
21.Sauro S, Gandolfi MG, Prati C, Mongiorgi R. Oxalate-containing phytocomplexes as dentine desensitizers: an in vitro study. Arch Oral Biol 2006; 51,655-64.
22.Kimura Y, Wilder-Smith P, Yonaga K, Matsumoto K. Treatment of dentine hypersensitivity by lasers: a review. J ClinPeriodontol2000; 27:715-21.
23.Pashley DH (2000) Potential treatment modalities. for dentine hypersensitivity: in-office products. In:Tooth wear and sensitivity: clinical advances inrestorative dentistry 2000, Addy M, EmberyG,Edgar WM, Orchardson R eds, Martin Dunitz,London 2009;51(3):351-65.
24. McCarthy D, Gillam DG, Parson DJ. In vitro effects of laser radiation on dentine surfaces. J Dent Res 1997;76, Special issue, 233.
25.Gandolfi MG, Farascioni S, Pashley DH, GiorgioG, Prati C. Calcium silicate coating derivedfrom Portland cement as treatment for hypersensitivedentine. J Dent 2008;36: 565-78.
26.Walsh LJ, Wang WS, Calar A, Devani C, Tran KK, Hall A.Effect of CCP–ACP versus potassium nitrate on cervicaldentinal hypersensitivity. J Dent Res 2006; 85.
27.Forsback AP, Areva S, Salonen JI. Mineralization of dentininduced by treatment with bioactive glass S53P4 in vitro.ActaOdontolScand 2004; 62 : 14-20.
28.Samruddhi D Pol, Mukesh Chute, TanayGunjikar, JyotiJonnala, Dilip G Pol: Advances in the Treatment of Dentinal Hypersensitivity 2011; 5(12):1249-50.
29.Frechoso SC, Menendez M, Guisasola C, Arregui I, Tejerina JM, Sicilia A. Evaluation of the efficacy of two potassium nitrate bioadhesive gels (5% and 10%) in the treatment of dentine hypersensitivity. A randomised clinical trial. J ClinPeriodontol 2003;
30 : 315-20. 30. Sanjay Miglani, et al. Dentin hypersensitivity: Recent trendsin management. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 2010: 13(4).
Copyright © 2013 Kamath Deepa G & Nayak Sangeeta U. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.