English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aim: Aim of the study is to evaluate the depth of penetration of different types of desensitizing agents into the dentinal tubules in vivo. Materials and methods: Twenty patients requiring tooth extraction for orthodontic purpose were selected. In all four premolars of the selected patients, small class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surface having depth of 0.5 mm. They were divided into four groups and treated with four different types of desensitizing agents (5% NaF solution, Gluma desensitizer, FluorProtector, and SuperSeal) for required time and then they were extracted. They were longitudinally sectioned and each section was studied by scanning electron microscope. Results: The mean depth of penetration of SuperSeal and Gluma was significantly higher than that of other agents (sodium fluoride and FluorProtector) (p<0.05). No significant difference was found between SuperSeal and Gluma (p>0.05). Conclusion: The depth of penetration of resinous desensitizing agent (Gluma) is maximum followed by potassium oxalate solution (SuperSeal) and fluoride varnish (FluorProtector). Clinical significance: Deeper the penetration of desensitizing agents into the dentinal tubules, longer the efficacy.

Comparative Evaluation of the Depth of Penetration of different Types of Desensitizing Agents into the Dentinal Tubules: An in vivo Study