Forums Erbium Lasers General Erbium Discussion Decreasing root sensitivity

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 39 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2942 Reply

    Glenn van As
    Spectator

    Hi folks at this time of year people are coming in with root sensitivity by the droves. I always feel at a loss to do much.

    Are any of you using the erbium to etch the root surface at a very low level and then add bonding agent to it.

    My periodontist has informed me that connective tissue grafts are better for covering the roots and are considered state of the art compared to restorations.

    Let me know what you guys are doing with your lasers to treat hypersensitivity to air and water at the cementum.

    Thanks………

    Glenn

    #7430 Reply

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Glenn,
    I’ve had mixed results.
    Pretty effective using .25w 0/0 starting defocused and circling inward until pt feels it. If I can get close enough to see some surface change, then sensitivity stops in alot of cases(especially those max 1st molars w/ buccal tooth brush abrasion).
    The most disappointing are those pts I’ve sent previously to the periodontist and now have 2-3 mm pockets but have to drink everything thru a straw. I’ve tried to do just a few teeth at a time but it seems the sensitivity comes from everywhere on those teeth. I think in light of the Fluoride discussion in another thread I might try some topical fluoride and lase that and see what happens.

    #7453 Reply

    Patricio
    Spectator

    Glenn,
    A recent article by Ron Kurthy(?) sorry Ron on the spelling, states that a product like Touch and Bond will seal up the tubules and that’s it.  I have a lady coming in in the next couple of days with serious sensitivity.  I thought I would try the bonding on one side and the laser on  the other to see what results.  I have had dependable results from the laser but not necessarily complete elimination of sensitivity in all cases.  

    I have noted the patient usually feels the 0.25W but saw that as a negative and backed off.  As you indicated Ron maybe this is the feedback of successful sensitivity reduction in that area.

    Pat

    #7444 Reply

    2thlaser
    Spectator

    Hey guys,
    In my experience, if you do what Ron suggests, .25W with 0/0 air and water, you actually close the tubules. BUT one must start much further away, as the laser energy causes heat buildup w/o air and water. You can use a little air at times, maybe 10%,but that in itself can be sensitive to the patient. I have had great success, and without adding a bonding agent, unless it is an abfraction area, then I bond to it.

    Again, most importantly, DO NOT START OUT VERY CLOSE TO THE SURFACE OF THE TOOTH. I start out 10-15mm away, and VERY SLOWLY bring the tip closer, and I ask the patient what if anything they are experiencing. I really haven’t “hurt” anyone to date doing the procedure in this manner, Ron, how bout you?
    Mark

    #7429 Reply

    Anonymous
    Guest
    QUOTE

    Again, most importantly, DO NOT START OUT VERY CLOSE TO THE SURFACE OF THE TOOTH. I start out 10-15mm away, and VERY SLOWLY bring the tip closer, and I ask the patient what if anything they are experiencing. I really haven’t “hurt” anyone to date doing the procedure in this manner, Ron, how bout you?
    Mark

    I second the notion of starting a long distance away and to also always keep the tip moving. I usually tell the patient that as soon as they start to feel it get warm to raise a hand so I can back off. I tell them I need to have them feel this to know we’re getting the actual sensitive area. Once backed off I pause a few seconds and get the patient to run their tongue over the area. Then I start circling in again.
    I have had 1 person (20 buccal, cervical) who couldn’t stand even .25 0/0 from any closer than the 10mm-he said this hurt and I could tell it wasn’t acting on his part.Couldn’t even rinse with tap water it was so touchy. Just decided to numb him up- infiltrated some Septocaine and finished with the laser.

    #7463 Reply

    Robert Gregg DDS
    Spectator

    Hi Guys,

    Everything you all have said is consistent with our long-time clinical experiences and observations.

    What we have concluded from both defocused and contact techniques is that starting defocused and NOT numb and moving and observing patient response is nearly always successful in reducng sensitivity;  whereas working numb and in contact was much more unpredictable.

    Lasing “out” to “in” = 90%+ effectiveness
    Lasing “in” and “on” = 50% effectiveness.

    That led us to conclude emperically that dentinal hypersensitivity is BOTH a phenomenon of irritation of the odontoplastic processes AND non-occluded tubules.  Because if all we do is try to occlude the tubules, we get mixed results.  If we address the odontoplastic processes in a defocused mode, THEN move in and alter the dentin surface, we are much more effective.

    But trying to get in contact on the distal CEJ or further interproximal can be real tough!  Hence incomplete treatment and results….thus the 90% rule.

    The 90% Rule:

    We have observed that patients cannot perceive a reduction in sensitivity unless it is reduced AT LEAST 85% to 90%.

    We were able to document as much as 80% reductions in pain response PER TOOTH, but when they drank cold water or sucked in air, they perceived NO change!!!:shocked:

    This led us to conclude that dentinal hypersensitivity is an ALL or NONE response.  If we don’t remove ALL of the contributing factors–we get very mixed and disappointing results.

    So, what we do now is establish a baseline of response with the patient and DOCUMENT it in the chart.  What I typically do is take an air syringe and explain to the patient that I am going to make a quick air test to measure and grade their senstivity/pain on a scale between 1 and 10, with 10 being unbearable pain.  I do a sample test on the back of their hand to prepare them for how quick it will be.

    Usually I get a report of 8-10.  Then I go through a defocused method as Mark and Ron described very well.  Then I re-test and record the patient’s report.  Usually they are in the 2-3 range, sometimes better.  Excellent tool for tracking results.

    Now all you smart Beamers should be thinking, “Well, did we reduce sensitivity or just create analgesis/anesthesia in the teeth.  The answer is YES!  You did both.

    Now the last thing to get you all as close to 100% success is to make sure that ALL occlusal trauma has been removed from the offending teeth–INCLUDING those teeth who’s gums have been amputated by the periodontist!  Don’t ignore the role of occlusal insult to the very tender pulp.

    Now to get you all bright beamers thinking even more, at some point you will realize that in the use of lasers to calm pulps down, you also have an VERY sensitive instrument for PULP TESTING…….any thoughts on how?:biggrin:

    Bob

    PS:  Glenn–I appreciate you commnet from your periodontist, but I take exception to what your periodontist said. I have never heard anyone suggest that covering the roots with grafts is SOC.  If that were so, then why do they routinely remove tissue in “push-back” and ressective perio disease tx procedures as Ron described?  I will check the perio references I have for their SOC position paper.  I don’t think they have one!?

    #7431 Reply

    Anonymous
    Guest

    Great post bob , thanks for sharing , challenging and teaching.

    QUOTE
    Quote: from Robert Gregg DDS on 10:23 am on Dec. 12, 2002[br}

    Now to get you all bright beamers thinking even more, at some point you will realize that in the use of lasers to calm pulps down, you also have an VERY sensitive instrument for PULP TESTING…….any thoughts on how?:biggrin:

    Here is 1  proposed method http://www.karna-ddscomfordent.com/LLLT-2.htm. I haven’t done this mainly because I was concerned (that using the diode and its absorption by pigment) about the tissue effect from tissue surface to the apices. I also thought 15-20 seconds of stimulation in 1 area w/o moving seemed quite long. Why direct at apices (and overlying tissue)and not pulp chamber itself? I also couldn’t find anything that supported this method.

    #7449 Reply

    Lee Allen
    Spectator

    Bob,

    What a useful posting on root sensitivity. I am about to venture into using a Waterlase and I learn the most from this type of posting.

    A few thoughts or questions arise: I have assumed that root sensitivity must be a pulpitis. The immediate result of the laser treatment is sealing/sterilizing the tubules but the pulpitis will take a tincture of time to resolve. What are the post op results from the laser treated patients? Does the 20 to 30%remaining sensitivity decrease as the inflamation is resolved with time, and if not, does that indicate there are still areas to treat? Are the patients happy enough with the results that the residual is tolerable and they are not interested in pursuing further remedy?

    I have many patients who are as anxious as I am to resolve their root sensivity and I would like to know what to expect. This helps jump start my learning process.

    Thanks again. smile.gif

    #7458 Reply

    Robert Gregg
    Participant

    Lee,

    Thanks for the kind words.

    Dentin and/or root hypersensitivity may involve more than just pulpitis.  See the article below on some theories.

    If you de-focus at a distance away from the tooth, you can get some thermal energy into the tubules and have a “biomodulating” effect on the action potentials of the OD processes and the unmylenated C fibers in the pulp–it seems.

    Occluding the tubules alone give us mixed results….around 50%.

    Defocusing and “biostimulating” the pulp/tubules gives us 90+%

    The sensitivity typically stays at the level of chairside treatment, however the patient may become dissatisfied if only 75% versus 95%.  Some others may feel that is just fine……

    One VERY common observation post-op to de-focused laser desensitization is that an ache or throb–usually mild–appears within a few hours post-op that can increase in intensity for a few days, then tapers off slowly over a week or two.  VERY common observation.

    Hope that gives you a “jump”!!

    Bob

    Dentinal Sensation and Hypersensitivity A Review of Mechanisms and Treatment Alternatives  Louis H. Berman


    DENTINAL SENSATION: MECHANISMS

    In any dental procedure, in the absence of local anesthesia, manipulation of dentin surfaces may cause pain. When dentin is exposed to thermal, osmotic or electrical stimuli, or when air blasts or various drugs are applied to its surface, the host feels pain which may be termed a “dentinalgia.” A “pulpalgia” is a more prolonged, chronic pain to given stimuli and may result from a rise in the local intrapulpal edema subsequent to deep caries and pulpal inflammation.1,2 Although histochemical, autoradiographic and electron microscopic studies have vividly described the relationship between the odontoblast and the neural fibers of the pulp, the exact mechanism of transmission of the pain response from the dentin to the terminal nerve endings is only hypothesized. Four theories have been proposed: the transducer, modulation, gate control and hydrodynamic theories.3,4 Of these theories, the hydrodynamic theory is currently believed most responsible for the transmission of dentinal sensation. However, a brief description of the other mechanisms will also be presented.

    Transducer Theory. This theory of dentinal sensation takes into consideration the “synaptic-like” relationship between the terminal, sensory nerve endings and the odontoblastic processes. If a true synapse were present between these two elements to facilitate the transmission of dentinal sensations, then a neural transmitting substance such as acetylcholine would be expected in this area of the odontoblastic process and the predentin. There is no direct evidence for the presence of acetylcholine activity in the neural transmission in the pulp.

    Modulation Theory. Upon an irritating stimulus to the dentin, the odontoblasts may become injured and subsequently release a variety of neurotransmitting agents as well as vasoactive and pain producing amines and proteins.5 These substances may modulate associated nerve fiber action potentials by increasing neuronal cAMP levels through cell membrane adenylate cyclase receptors.6

    Gate Control Theory and Vibration. When the dentin is irritated, for example, by cavity preparation, all of the pulpal nerves become activated from the vibrations. The larger myelinated fibers may accommodate to the sensations. The smaller C-fibers may tend to be maintained and not adjust to the stimulus. Thus, as the low-intensity “pain gates” from the larger fibers are closed, the high-intensity “pain gates” from the smaller fibers are enhanced.3

    “Pain gates” may be opened by some stimuli, such as anxiety, and may be closed by distracting stimuli such as “audio-analgesia” or gingival stimulation. Van Hassel2 demonstrated in monkeys that cortical responses to pulpal stimulation can be diminished by concomitantly stimulating the gingiva.

    However, the gate theory does little to explain how pain responses from the dentin are transmitted and perceived by the nerve endings of the pulp—only how they may be centrally interpreted.

    Hydrodynamic Theory. Fish in 19278 observed the interstitial fluid of the dentin and pulp, referring to it as the “dental lymph.” He postulated that the flow of this fluid could take place in either an outward or inward direction depending on the pressure variations in the surrounding tissue. Isokawa9 found no pulpal lymphatics in dog teeth, but suggested that the pulpal lymph flow was continuous with that of the dentinal tubule fluid. This idea of fluid movement within the dentinal tubules is the basis for the transmission of sensations according to the hydrodynamic theory.

    Short-term stimulation of the dentin and the resulting pain, a “dentinalgia,” is not necessarily the result of local changes in the intrapulpal pressure. According to the hydrodynamic theory, as put forth by Brannstrom and Astrom,11 a dentinalgia results from a stimulus causing minute changes in the fluid movement within the dentinal tubules. This may subsequently deform the odontoblast or its process and hence cause an elicitation of pain via the intimately associated “mechano-receptor-like” nerve endings.

    Mjor and Pindborg12 stated: “Pulp and dentin sensation is characterized by being limited to pain only, irrespective of the initiating factor.” There is no direct support for any type of specialized terminal nerve receptors for hot, cold, electrical, osmotic, dehydration or chemical stimuli in dentin. The interpretation of most of these stimuli can be explained by the hydrodynamic theory. Figure 1 will help to visualize this model, as explained below.

    The dehydration of dentin (i.e., by air-blasts) is probably the clearest example for understanding dentin sensation. When Brannstrom applied absorbent paper to exposed dentin it caused pain; but no pain was elicited using wet paper.11,13 The outward movement of the dentinal fluid into the dehydrating source (i.e., air-blasts or absorbent paper) is thought to stimulate the “mechano-receptor” of the odontoblast, causing pain.

    The perception of acute thermal stimulation can also be explained by the hydrodynamic theory. The coefficient of thermal expansion of the dentinal tubule fluid is about ten times that of the tubule wall. Therefore, heat applied to dentin will result in an expansion of the fluid, and, conversely, cold will result in a contraction of the fluid, with both creating an excitation of the “mechano-receptor.”14,21,25 This fluid-flow model is further reenforced by the finding that pain is felt before temperature changes can be measured on the pulpal side of the dentin.15
    It is also a common clinical finding that pain is produced when sugar or salted solutions are placed in contact with exposed dentin. When the irritant is rinsed or brushed away, the discomfort subsides.10 This again can be explained by dentin tubule fluid movements. Fluids of a relatively low osmolarity (i.e., dentinal tubule fluid) will have a tendency to flow towards solutions of higher osmolarity (i.e., salt or sugar solutions). When iso-osmotic solutions are applied, no stimulus is felt.

    Source: Journal of Periodontology on CD-ROM (Copyrights © 1998, AAP), 1985 Apr (216 – 222):

    #7454 Reply

    Patricio
    Spectator

    Bob et al,
    I followed your strategy today on desensitization of 12 teeth(two molars and a bi in each quad). I requested and recorded a baseline sensitivity from the patient on a scale of 1 to 10 and then asked about today.  I then explained that we were look for subjective improvement not total reduction of sensitivity.  She said she was a 4/5 today so I suggested we try for a 2/3.  All the areas were on the buccal either recession or recession and abfraction.  I defocused and moved in as possible stopping when she let me know she was feeling it.(Biolase – .25W no w or A for about 35 to 45 seconds per tooth surface).  I had to return to one molar a second time and included the lingual on the second pass.  The patient was very satisfied and accepting of a reduction above 0 following a drink of cold water.  The success was in the patient management.  Gracias!
    Pat

    #7434 Reply

    jetsfan
    Spectator

    Yesterday I had a young woman with extreme ypersensitivity on a #29. At .25W 0/0 I couldn’t get within an inch of the tooth. I held the tip outside the mouth , retracted the lip and attempted to apply laser energy in a very defocused mode. At that distance it was difficukt to tell if I was aimed at the correct part of the tooth, but she was able to tell me. I eventually anesthestized, lasered area and placed duraphat.
    I also have one other patient who has the most severe hypersensitivity post perio treatment that I ever saw.
    I attempted desensitizing teeth during my training session with zero success. After reading many posts online I have subsequently attempted treatment also with zero sucess.
    These were two failures, I have had several sucess stories, but when I hear people talk of 100% sucess it makes me wonder.
    Comments and sugestions appreciated.
    GO JETS!

    #7450 Reply

    Patricio
    Spectator

    Jetsfan,
    I think we need to defer to Bob for the best explanation.  My only comment is,” perfection is in heaven”.  I have had people I could not touch without local and so I go quicly to it.  I never promise no discomfort I state what most people experience and ask them to let me know if the laser is bothering them.  Some people(I get the feeling )just want to be anesthetized.  Any discomfort is too much.  I wonder how your second case could eat or drink with such sensitivity.  Is it possibly a fear of any dentist pain?   The ligajet is a big help for sensitive teeth needing restorations.   See John Kanca’s website for his routine.  The site is found in one of my posts under hard tissue- anesthesia I believe.  Let’s see what the big boys say.
    Pat

    #7438 Reply

    2thlaser
    Spectator

    Hi Guys,
    For what it’s worth, I have never heard anyone talk of 100% success without anesthesia. Honestly, I have had to anesthetize 8 people since last Feb. I counted over 2000 procedures where I haven’t had to use any anesthetic. The answer seems to be patience. Defocus, and have patience with the “numbing” effect. It’s not perfect, like Pat says, and some “feel” something. Never promise it won’t hurt at all, BUT, always ask afterwards, would they have wanted the “shot” and “drill” or the laser. I do ask, and so far, 100% have said, LASER! No joke. If you use your laser alot, you will get proficient, if you don’t it’ll seem like it takes forever to get the learning curve down. HAVE PATIENCE. You will get the curve down, and when you do, it’s incredible. My 2 cents Montanan’s worth! Hope everyone is having a great New Year so far!
    Mark

    #7455 Reply

    Patricio
    Spectator

    Mark,
    Great advice. patience, patience, patience.  I agee, I ask every person how they like the laser experience and I have not had one person who preferred the old way over the laser.  I will work on the patience end of the process.
    Pat

    #7439 Reply

    2thlaser
    Spectator

    One other thing. Lasers are very sensitive devices. They change in their calibration periodically. IF you are having some sensitivity issues, have the technicians come out and reset your PK’s. This morning, my Biolase tech just happened to be in the area, and I have been getting a touch more sensitivity lately. We set these a number of months ago, and the values were fine. We found out this morning, that my laser has gotten a bit “hot”, so it could be in the software, or wherever, but that explains why I have had a slight difference. I bet I see a difference with the new calibrations. Laser dentistry is so exciting, and new, and we just have to put up with the learning we need to do each time we pick up the handpiece. Not the same as a turbine needing to be replaced huh? I will let you all know how the new calibrations work out. Really, Biolase has been great in their support, and I can’t say enough. I really haven’t had much problems at all with my Waterlase, this is very minor, but again, another part of the learning curve for all of us.
    Glenn, I know your unit has variable Hz settings, BUT with the power adjustments, do you have to, or have you had, your unit calibrated every once in a while, and if so, have you seen any variations in Wattage output after a few months/year of use? We have been advised to have our units calibrated at least once per year, I have mine done more often, because I use it for ALL procedures I can, it’s my workhorse, so I feel the need to check it now and again. This is the only time I have had to have it reset (it got a bit hotter in the Wattage settings). Just wondering.
    Hope everyone is having a great Year!!
    Mark

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 39 total)
Reply To: Decreasing root sensitivity
Your information: