Advertisement

Efficiency of desensitizing materials in xerostomic patients with head and neck cancer: a comparative clinical study

  • Roberto PinnaEmail author
  • E. Milia
  • P. Usai
  • P. Crivelli
  • S. Pagano
  • G. Sotgiu
  • G. Schmalz
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the clinical effectiveness of four desensitizing materials in patients who are xerostomic due to radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) in comparison to a healthy group with normal salivation.

Methods and materials

The study was conducted as a split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Forty HNC patients (group A) and 46 healthy patients (group B) suffering from dentin hypersensitivity (DH) were included. Salivary flow was determined through a scialometric test. Hypersensitivity was assessed with air stimulus and tactile stimulus. The materials used as desensitizing agents were Vertise Flow, Universal Dentin Sealant, Clearfil Protect Bond, and Flor-Opal Varnish. The response was recorded before application of the materials, immediately after, and at 1 week, 4 weeks, and 12 weeks.

Results

Salivary flow rates in groups A/B were 0.15/0.53 mL/min (unstimulated) and 0.54/1.27 mL/min (stimulated), respectively. In group A, 100 hypersensitive teeth were included. Application of the desensitizing agents significantly decreased the hypersensitivity immediately and throughout the 4-week follow-up (p < 0.001). However, after the 12-week timepoint, a loss of efficacy was detected in all agents (p = 0.131). In group B, 116 hypersensitive teeth were included. The materials performed a more stable action, although a loss of effectiveness was detected at 12-week control (p = 0.297).

Conclusion

The efficiency of the desensitizing agents after the first application was similar in both groups. In the radiated group, this effect lasted for shorter periods than in healthy controls.

Clinical relevance

HNC patients with hyposalivation may be a new risk group for DH.

Keywords

Dry mouth Hyposalivation Dentin hypersensitivity Radiation therapy Head and neck cancer 

Notes

Funding information

The authors declare that no financial relationships exist regarding any of the products involved in this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

The protocol and informed consent forms were approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Sassari (no. 1000/CE).

The study followed CONSORT guidelines and was registered at the US National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov) # NCT02766127.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Furness S, Worthington HV, Bryan G, Birchenough S, McMillan R (2011) Interventions for the management of dry mouth: topical therapies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 7:CD008934.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008934.pub2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pinna R, Campus G, Cumbo E, Mura I, Milia E (2015) Xerostomia induced by radiotherapy: an overview of the physio-pathology, clinical evidence and management of the oral damage. The Clin Risk Manag 4:171–188.  https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S70652 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    López-Jornet MP, García-Teresa G, Viñas M, Vinuesa T (2011) Clinical and antimicrobial evaluation of a mouthwash and toothpaste for xerostomia: a randomized, double-blind, crossover study. J Dent 39:757–763.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2011.08.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hahnel S, Schwarz S, Zeman F, Schäfer L, Behr M (2014) Prevalence of xerostomia and hyposalivation and their association with quality of life in elderly patients in dependence on dental status and prosthetic rehabilitation: a pilot study. J Dent 42:664–670.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.03.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chambers MS, Rosenthal DI, Weber RS (2007) Radiation-induced xerostomia. Head Neck 29:58–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Epstein JB, Robertson M, Emerton S, Phillips N, Stevenson-Moore P (2001) Quality of life and oral function in patients treated with radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Head Neck 23:389–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller EH, Quinn AI (2006) Dental considerations in the management of head and neck cancer patients. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 39:319–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ben-Aryeh H, Miron D, Berdicevsky I, Szargel R, Gutman D (1985) Xerostomia in the elderly: prevalence, diagnosis, complications and treatment. Gerodontology 4:77–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Almståhl A, Wikström M (1998) Oral microflora in subjects with reduced salivary secretion. J Dent Res 78:1410–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lingström P, Birkhed D (1993) Plaque pH and oral retention after consumption of starchy snack products at normal and low salivary secretion rate. Acta Odontol Scand 51:379–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cagetti MG, Mastroberardino S, Milia E, Cocco F, Lingström P, Campus G (2013) The use of probiotic strains in caries prevention: a systematic review. Nutrients 5:2530–2550.  https://doi.org/10.3390/nu5072530 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Delaviz Y, Finer Y, Santerre JP (2014) Biodegradation of resin composites and adhesives by oral bacteria and saliva: a rationale for new material designs that consider the clinical environment and treatment challenges. Dent Mater 30:16–32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.08.201 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Milia E, Pinna R, Filigheddu E, Eramo S (2016) Adhesive restorations and the oral environmental behaviour. In: Rudawska A (ed) Adhesives–applications and properties. Rijeka, InTech, pp 137–165Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brännström M (1966) Sensitivity of dentine. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 21:517–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jones SB, Parkinson CR, Jeffery P, Davies M, Macdonald EL, Seong J et al (2015) A randomised clinical trial investigating calcium sodium phosphosilicate as a dentine mineralising agent in the oral environment. J Dent 43:757–764.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.10.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brännström M, Linden LA, Johnson G (1968) Movement of dentinal and pulpal fluid caused by clinical procedures. J Dent Res 47:679–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Loveren C (2013) Exposed cervical dentin and dentin hypersensitivity summary of the discussion and recommendations. Clin Oral Investig 17:S73–S76.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0902-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mantzourani M, Sharma D (2013) Dentine sensitivity: past, present and future. J Dent 41:S3–S17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(13)70002-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pashley DH (1986) Dentine permeability, dentine sensitivity and treatment through tubule occlusion. J End 12:465–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pamir T, Özyazici M, Baloglu E, Önal B (2005) The efficacy of three desensitizing agents in treatment of dentine hypersensitivity. J Clin Pharm Ther 30:73–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Duran I, Sengun A (2004) The long-term effectiveness of five current desensitizing products on cervical dentine sensitivity. J Oral Rehabil 31:351–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vano M, Derchi G, Barone A, Pinna R, Usai P, Covani (2018) Reducing dentine hypersensitivity with nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Investig 22:313–320.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2113-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Milia E, Castelli G, Bortone A, Sotgiu G, Manunta A, Pinna R, Gallina G (2012) Short-term response of three resin-based materials as desensitizing agents under oral environmental exposure. Acta Odontol Scand 71:599–609.  https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2012.700063 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pinna R, Bortone A, Sotgiu G, Dore S, Usai P, Milia E (2015) Clinical evaluation of the efficacy of one self-adhesive composite in dental hypersensitivity. Clin Oral Investig 19:1663–1672.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1390-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sreebny LM (1996) Xerostomia: diagnosis, management and clinical complications. In: Edgar WM, O’Mullane DM (eds) Saliva and oral health, 2nd edn. British Dental Association, London, pp 43–66Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Birang R, Poursamimi J, Gutknecht N, Lampert F, Mir M (2007) Comparative evaluation of the effects of Nd:YAG and Er:YAG laser in dentin hypersensitivity treatment. Lasers Med Sci 22:21–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ritter AV, de L Dias W, Miguez P, Caplan DJ, Swift EJ Jr (2006) Treating cervical dentin hypersensitivity with fluoride varnish. A randomized clinical study. J Am Dent Assoc 137:1013–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wang L, Magalhães AC, Francisconi-Dos-Rios LF, Calabria MP, Araújo D, Buzalaf M, Lauris J, Pereira JC (2016) Treatment of dentin hypersensitivity using Nano-hydroxyapatite pastes: a randomized three-month clinical trial. Oper Dent 41:E93–E101.  https://doi.org/10.2341/15-145-C CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Splieth CH, Tachou A (2013) Epidemiology of dentin hypersensitivity. Clin Oral Investig 17:S3–S8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0889-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Loh SY, Mcleod RW, Elhassan HA (2017) Trismus following different treatment modalities for head and neck cancer: a systematic review of subjective measures. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4519-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rees JS, Addy M (2004) A cross-sectional study of buccal cervical sensitivity in UK general dental practice and a summary review of prevalence studies. Int J Dent Hyg 2:64–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McComb D, Erickson RL, Maxymiw WG, Wood RE (2002) A clinical comparison of glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in the treatment of cervical caries in xerostomic head and neck radiation patients. Oper Dent 27:430–437PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Alghilan MA, Cook NB, Platt JA, Eckert GJ, Hara AT (2015) Susceptibility of restorations and adjacent enamel/dentine to erosion under different salivary flow conditions. J Dent 43:1476–1482.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.10.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kielbassa AM, Muntz I, Bruggmoser G, Schulte-Monting J (2002) Effect of demineralization and remineralization on microhardness of irradiated dentin. J Clin Dent 13:104–110PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fränzel W, Gerlach R, Hein HJ, Schaller HG (2006) Effect of tumour therapeutic irradiation on the mechanical properties of teeth tissue. Z Med Phys 16:148–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wijers OB, Levendag PC, Braaksma MM, Boonzaaijer M, Visch LL, Schmitz PI (2002) Patients with head and neck cancer cured by radiation therapy: a survey of the dry mouth syndrome in long-term survivors. Head Neck 24:737–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Keilbassa AM et al; Grötz KA, Duschner H, Kutzner J, Thelen M, Wagner W (1998) Histographic study of the direct effects of radiation on dental enamel. Mund Kiefer Gesichts Chir 2:85–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Galetti R, Santos-Silva AR, Antunes AN, Alves Fde A, Lopes MA, de Goes MF (2014) Radiotherapy does not impair dentin adhesive properties in head and neck cancer patients. Clin Oral Investig 18:1771–1778.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1155-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    da Cunha SR, Ramos PA, Haddad CM, da Silva JL, Fregnani ER, Aranha AC (2016) Effects of different radiation doses on the bond strengths of two different adhesive systems to enamel and dentin. J Adhes Dent 18(2):151–156.  https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a35841 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lieshout HF, Bots CP (2014) The effect of radiotherapy on dental hard tissue--a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig 18:17–24.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1034-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bernard C, Villat C, Abouelleil H, Gustin MP, Grosgogeat B (2015) Tensile bond strengths of two adhesives on irradiated and nonirradiated human dentin. Biomed Res Int 2015:798972.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/798972 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vogl V, Hiller KA, Buchalla W, Federlin M, Schmalz G (2016) Controlled, prospective, randomized, clinical split-mouth evaluation of partial ceramic crowns luted with a new, universal adhesive system/resin cement: results after 18 months. Clin Oral Investig 20(9):2481–2492.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1779-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Milia E, Cumbo E, Cardoso RJ, Gallina G (2012) Current dental adhesives systems. A narrative review. Curr Pharm Des 18:5542–5552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ (2005) Polymerization shrinkage and contraction stress of dental resin composites. Dent Mater 21:1150–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kermanshahi S, Santerre JP, Cvitkovitch DG, Finery Y (2010) Biodegradation of resin–dentin interfaces increases bacterial microleakage. J Dent Res 89:996–1001.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034510372885 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Spencer P, Ye Q, Misra A, Goncalves SE, Laurence JS (2014) Proteins, pathogens, and failure at the composite-tooth interface. J Dent Res 93:1243–1249.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034514550039 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Milia E, Pinna R, Castelli G, Bortone A, Marceddu S, Garcia-Godoy F, Gallina G (2012) TEM morphological characterization of a one-step self-etching system applied clinically to human caries-affected dentin and deep sound dentin. Am J Dent 25:321–326PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pinna R, Maioli M, Eramo S, Mura I, Milia E (2015) Carious affected dentine: its behaviour in adhesive bonding. Aust Dent J 60:276–293.  https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12309 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zhang SC, Kern M (2009) The role of host-derived dentinal matrix metalloproteinases in reducing dentin bonding of resin adhesives. Int J Oral Sci 1:163–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kalk WW, Vissink A, Spijkervet FK, Bootsma H, Kallenberg CG, NieuwAmerongen AV (2001) Sialometry and sialochemistry: diagnostic tools for Sjögren's syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis 60:1110–1116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gillam DG (2013) Current diagnosis of dentin hypersensitivity in the dental office: an overview. Clin Oral Investig 17:S21–S29.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0911-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biomedical SciencesUniversity of SassariSassariItaly
  2. 2.Department of Medicine, Surgery and Experimental ScienceUniversity of SassariSassariItaly
  3. 3.Department of Surgical and Biomedical SciencesUniversity of PerugiaPerugiaItaly
  4. 4.Department of Conservative and Operative DentistryUniversity Hospital RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  5. 5.Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine (ZMK Bern)University of BernBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations