***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of two desensitizing agents in the reduction of dentin hypersensitivity in a r and omized , double-blind , split-mouth clinical trial . Seventy-seven teeth from 13 patients that presented some degree of sensitivity to probing and /or air stimulation were treated with one of the following desensitizing agents : Oxa-Gel ( G1 ) , Sensi Kill ( G2 ) and placebo gel ( G3 - control ) . According to paired t-test , all treatments , even the placebo gel , were capable of reducing sensitivity scores for both stimuli . Analysis of data by ANOVA and Tukey 's test ( ? = 0.05 ) showed that the sensitivity scores were significantly lower only for Sensi Kill in comparison to the other products ( Oxa-Gel and placebo ) , when air stimulus was applied . It may be concluded that treatment with Sensi Kill presented a slightly better performance in reducing dentin hypersensitivity when compared to the other desensitizing agent INTRODUCTION Various methods and material s are used in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity . The aim of this r and omized prospect i ve controlled clinical trial was to evaluate and compare the desensitizing effects of the neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet ( Nd : YAG ) laser and fluoride varnish by considering the degree of pre- and posttreatment pain , discomfort , and functional complications . METHODS Twenty patients with clinical ly diagnosed cervical dentin hypersensitive teeth were included and r and omly allocated to either the application of fluoride varnish ( group fluoride ) or Nd : YAG laser ( 100 mJ , 20 Hz ; group Nd : YAG ) . The assessment of pain and discomfort was performed by a visual analog scale after an air blast at baseline , immediately after treatment , and at patient visits on weeks 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4 . RESULTS Laser treatment result ed in significant improvements of discomfort immediately after treatment and after 1 week . At the 2- , 3- , and 4-week examination , the discomfort in group fluoride decreased up to nearly 75 % to 85 % of baseline scores , whereas the effect of the laser stayed nearly unchanged . The visual analog scale scores for pain at 4 weeks examination were significantly lower in the fluoride group compared with those in the laser group ( p < 0.05 ) . CONCLUSIONS Nd : YAG laser is a suitable tool for the immediately successful reduction of dentinal hypersensitivity and has better patient satisfaction and shorter treatment time OBJECTIVE Dentin hypersensitivity , or what patients may describe as " sensitive teeth , " is defined as a short , sharp pain arising from exposed dentin in response to thermal , evaporative , tactile , electrical , osmotic or chemical stimuli . It is widely accepted that dentin hypersensitivity is an uncomfortable condition that also affects function and quality of life . This study determines the differences in efficiency of three desensitizing products when compared with a placebo . METHODS A r and omized controlled clinical trial was conducted to compare three different  professional dentin desensitizer agents in 52 patients . The age and sex of the patients was recorded .  Gluma Desensitizer ( Heraeus Kulzer ) , UltraEZ ( Ultradent Products , Inc ) and Duraphat ( Colgate Oral Pharmaceuticals , Inc , New York , NY , USA ) were used as desensitizer agents and distilled water was used as the placebo . The baseline measurement of the dentin hypersensitivity was made by using a visual analog scale ( VAS ) . Twenty-four hours and seven days after application of the desensitizer agents and placebo , a new VAS analysis was conducted for patients ' sensitivity level . The desensitizer agents were compared in terms of mean values , and ANOVA was used for testing differences among the groups ( p<0.05 ) . RESULTS The results showed that the mean pain scores of the placebo group were significantly higher than that of the study groups ( p<0.05 ) . The VAS analysis revealed a significant decrease in dentin hypersensitivity over time with the use of agents ( p<0.05 ) . No statistically significant difference was found among the three desensitizing agents ( p>0.05 ) . CONCLUSIONS These three desensitizing agents , which contain different active ingredients , were effective in relieving dentin hypersensitivity . However , no superiority was found in dentin sensitivity relief among the agents OBJECTIVE The advent of dental lasers has raised another possible treatment option for dentine hypersensitivity ( DH ) and has become a research interest in the last decades . The aim of this r and omized , controlled , double-blind , split mouth , clinical study was to evaluate and compare the desensitizing effects of erbium , chromium-doped : yttrium , sc and ium , gallium and garnet ( Er , Cr : YSGG ) to galium-aluminium-arsenide ( GaAlAs ) laser on DH . METHODS Fifty-one patients participated in this study for a total of 174 teeth .  DH was assessed for all groups with a visual analog scale . For each patient , the teeth were r and omized to three groups . In the diode laser group , sensitive teeth were irradiated with the GaAlAs laser at 8.5J/cm(2 ) energy density . In the Er , Cr : YSGG laser group , sensitive teeth were irradiated with Er , Cr : YSGG laser in the hard tissue mode using a none-contact probe at an energy level of 0.25W and repetition rate of 20Hz , 0 % water and 10 % air . In the control group no treatment was performed . Treatment time was 60s for GaAlAs laser and 30s for Er , Cr : YSGG laser . RESULTS When compared with the control group and baseline data , in both laser groups , laser irradiation provided a desensitizing effect immediately after treatment and this effect was maintained throughout the study ( p<0.05 ) . No significant differences between Er , Cr : YSGG and GaAlAs laser groups were found at any follow-up examination ( p>0.05 ) . CONCLUSION Based on these findings , it may be concluded that both Er , Cr : YSGG and GaAlAs lasers were effective in the treatment of DH following a single application UNLABELLED The dentin hypersensitivity is a painful condition rather prevalent in the general population . There are several ways of treatment for such condition , including the low intensity lasers . The proposal of this study was to verify the effectiveness of the Gallium-Aluminum-Arsenide diode laser in the treatment of this painful condition , using a placebo as control . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Thirty-two patients were selected , 22 females and 10 males , with ages ranging from 20 to 52 years old . The 32 patients were r and omly distributed into two groups , treated and control ; the sample consisted of 68 teeth , 35 in the treated group and 33 in the control group . The treated group was exposed to six laser applications with intervals from 48 to 72 hours , and the control group received , as placebo , applications of a curing light . RESULTS A significant reduction was observed in the pain condition between the initial phase and after six laser applications ; however , such reduction could also be observed for the control group exposed to the placebo . CONCLUSION Therapy with the low intensity Gallium-Aluminum-Arsenide laser - AsGaAl induces a statistically significant reduction in the painful condition after each application and between the beginning and end of treatment , although there was no statistically significant difference between the treated group ( laser ) and the control group ( placebo ) at the end of treatment and after the mediate evaluation results ( after 6 weeks ) , this way impairing the real measurement of laser effectiveness and placebo effect OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare clinical ly the efficacy of desensitizer toothpaste alone and in combination with the diode laser in the management of dentin hypersensitivity ( DH ) , as well as both the immediate and late therapeutic effects on teeth with gingival recessions . MATERIAL S AND METHODS In total , 52 teeth diagnosed with DH in 13 ( seven women , six men , aged 16 - 48 years ) healthy adult patients were included in this study , and teeth were r and omly divided equally into two groups : the test group , which received treatment with desensitizer toothpaste and GaAlAs ( diode ) laser , and the control group , treated with desensitizer toothpaste .  DH was assessed by means of an air stimulus , and a visual analogue scale ( VAS ) was used to measure DH . The selected teeth in the test group received laser therapy for three sessions . Teeth subjected to diode-laser treatment were irradiated at 100 mW for 25 sec at 808 nm , with continuous-emission , noncontact mode , perpendicular to the surface , with scanning movements on the region of exposed root surfaces . RESULTS Significant reduction of DH occurred at all times measured during the three treatment sessions in the test group . When compared with the means of the responses in the three treatment sessions of the two groups , the test group showed a higher degree of desensitization in teeth with gingival recession than did the control group ( p < 0.001 ) . The immediate and late therapeutic effects of the diode laser were more evident compared with those of desensitizer toothpaste . CONCLUSIONS Within the limitations of the present study , a significant effect of combined desensitizer toothpaste and diode laser therapy occurs in the treatment of desensitization of teeth with gingival recession . Desensitizer toothpaste appears to have the therapeutic potential to alleviate DH . Conversely , diode laser can be used to reduce DH This double-blind split-mouth trial with 16 adult patients investigated the ability of a dentine bonding agent ( DBA )  to reduce cervical dentine sensitivity . Following stimulation of pairs of teeth by conventional tactile and air blast stimuli , together with controlled evaporative and cold fluid stimuli , sensitivity was recorded using tactile threshold , visual-analogue scale ( VAS ) and short-form McGill pain question naire ( SFMPQ ) , prior to and 1 week following treatment with DBA . Prior to assessment , subjects recorded their perceived overall sensitivity using VAS and SFMPQ . Application of each stimulus was separated by 10 min . Sensitivity was recorded by a clinician blinded to the treatment status of each tooth . The control tooth was treated by applying DBA to coronal enamel . Dietary information was collected after the post-treatment assessment . There was a significant ( p<0.05 ) improvement in tactile threshold and air flow and air blast VAS scores , together with reductions in sensitivity to evaporative stimuli when assessed by SFMPQ . Treatment response was not influenced by the subjects ' age , gender , diet , use of fluoride-containing or silica-based toothpastes or fluoride mouthwashes , or a history of previous sensitivity treatment . It is concluded that topical application of DBA is an effective way to reduce cervical dentine sensitivity This study compares two commercially-available products for treating dentine sensitivity , Duraphat , a fluoride varnish , and SuperSeal , an oxalate preparation .  48 patients with dentine sensitivity were recruited . Sensitivity was assessed by visual analogue scales ( VAS ) to record pain following stimulation of exposed dentine surfaces by tactile stimulus ( sharp probe at 60 g force ) , thermal stimulus ( ethyl chloride ) and evaporative stimulus ( air drying ) . Patients were r and omised to treatment with either Duraphat or SuperSeal . After 4 weeks , sensitivity assessment s were repeated . Both treatments result ed in statistically significant reductions in VAS scores for all stimuli ( P<0.05 ) . However , analysis of covariance failed to identify statistically significant differences in the magnitude of reductions in sensitivity achieved by each of the products ( P>0.05 ) . The treatments had similar efficacy and both can be considered effective therapies for treating dentine sensitivity The aim of this clinical trial was to investigate the effects of topical applications of Gluma 3 Primer or Gluma 2000 conditioning solutions on  hypersensitive erosion/abrasion lesions . Thirty-four patients were included in the trial with at least two teeth each presenting severe sensitivity . From a total of 116 teeth , 40 were treated with Gluma 3 Primer , 42 with Gluma 2000 Conditioner and 34 served as the control .  Sensitivity was recorded as response to tactile and cold air stimuli prior to treatment as baseline , immediately after the topical application of the agents , after 1 week , 1 month and 6 months . Both Gluma groups showed a highly significant reduction in sensitivity between baseline and postoperative pain scores ( P < 0.05 ) and between the postoperative and the 1-week responses ( P < 0.05 ) . The sensitivity scores were not different between 1 week and 6 months . In the control group , no pain reduction was registered between baseline and up to 1-month recall . After 6 months , however , the sensitivity was spontaneously slightly reduced . At the end of the 6-month observation time , 29 Gluma and 31 Gluma 2000 treated teeth no longer showed dentin sensitivity OBJECTIVE The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of CO(2 ) and Er : YAG lasers alone and in combination with topical sodium fluoride ( NaF ) in the management of dentine hypersensitivity .  MATERIAL S AND METHODS A group of 50 patients presenting with a total of 420 hypersensitive teeth were r and omly allocated into five groups . Group 1 was treated with 2 % NaF , groups 2 and 3 were lased by a CO(2 ) ( 1 W , continuous wave mode , for 10 sec ) or Er : YAG ( 30 Hz , 60 mJ for 10 sec , without water/air spray ) laser , and groups 4 and 5 received NaF plus the CO(2 ) and the Er : YAG laser , 
    Output:
    
The results from network meta- analysis showed that most active treatment options had significantly better treatment outcome than placebo