Clinical uses of glutaraldehyde/2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate (GLUMA[R])[c]

Citation metadata

Date: March-April 2013
From: Northwest Dentistry Journal(Vol. 92, Issue 2)
Publisher: Minnesota Dental Association
Document Type: Article
Length: 3,310 words

Document controls

Main content

Abstract: 

Glutaraldehyde/2-Hydroxyethylmethacrylate (GLUMA[R]) is a chemical frequently used for desensitization of teeth and has other uses as suggested in the literature. Some newer recommendations have been made relative to its use during tooth preparation, as a disinfectant, rewetting during bonding, prior to cementation of crowns and bridges, and in dealing with pulpal exposures. This article will explore the science behind these and other applications for this chemical and its effect on the tooth structure and its local environment.

Full Text: 

Introduction

Glutaraldehyde/2-Hydroxyethylmethacrylate (GLUMA[R]) has two active chemicals that affect tooth structure. 2-Hydroxyethylmethacrylate (HEMA) has been used as a bonding agent, (1,2) alone and in combination with other materials. (3) Glutaraldehyde has been used as a disinfectant alone and in combination with other chemicals. (4) GLUMA[R] was originally developed in 1984, and its patent has recently expired. Newer clone products are now available that are less expensive than the original GLUMA[R] Desensitizing product (not to be confused with GLUMA[R] Comfort Bond, a dentin bonding system; Heraeus Kulzer, South Bend IN), such as: G5 (Clinician's Choice, Boca Raton FL); Calmit (Caulk, Milford DE); Microprime G (Danville, Danville CA); Hema-Glu Desensitizer G (Health Dent'l, Naperville IL); Glu-Sense (Centrix, Shelton CT); Alpha-Ease (Dental Technologies Inc. Lincolnwood IL); and Hema-Seal G (Germiphene, Bantford, ON, Canada).

Effect on Dentin

As dentin matures, the triple helix structure of the collagen in it transforms reducible cross-links among the collagen fibrils with the nucleophilic addition of lysine and/or hydroxylysine, which results in more cross-linking collagen molecules than found in their reducible precursors. (5) More stable cross-linked bonds tend to give the tooth an ability to bend and recover, preventing fracture and making the tooth able to withstand normal occlusal forces.

When Glutaraldehyde-HEMA is added to the collagen of dentin, it reduces the lysine and hydroxylysine residues and decreases these residues in the reducible cross-links. The amino acids and cross-link composition is altered by this compound, increasing the cross-links and making the dentin stiffer. (6) Plain glutaraldehyde has been shown to improve dentin collagen stability and bond strength in both sound and caries-affected dentin. (7) Higher and increased stability of the tensile properties of glutaraldehyde-treated dentin were found after eight-month exposure to collagenase and water storage, indicating an enhanced preventive and restorative durability. (8) Glutaraldehyde increases cross-linked collagen and decreases the reducible cross-linking (easily broken bonds), increasing the toughness of the dentin and blocking the action of collagenase, preventing biodegradation. (9) Wet bonding to dentin causes a degradation of the collagen, which is prevented by the addition of the cross-linking agent glutaraldehyde. (10,11)

Munksgaard describes the chemical reaction when gluteraldehyde with HEMA is used: "... on application of GLUMA[R], amino-group-containing substances in dentin react with glutaraldehyde and start the formation of a HEMA polymer. This product may be cross-linked by an alpha,beta-unsaturated glutaraldehyde aldol condensation product and may bond to dentin by aldehyde fixation to dentin proteins. Resin composite will bond to this product by copolymerization." (12) The bond is thought to be to lysine and hydroxylysine in the collagen fibrils. (5,6)

Use of increased collagen cross-linking during dentin bonding can increase the mechanical properties of the dentin over time and improve the durability of the collagen bonding over time. (13,14) In addition, the combination of glutaraldehyde and HEMA is antimicrobial and occludes dentinal tubules, limiting the fluid flow and decreasing pulpal sensitivity. (14,15,16)

Pulp Capping

Use of dentin bonding systems alone in pulp capping has been shown to lead to persistent pulpal inflammatory reactions with a lack of dentin bridging found with calcium hydroxide. (17) Self-etching adhesive systems have a similar result in vivo. In an in vivo study using a rat model, calcium hydroxide produced remarkably better results with less pulpal inflammation. It was noted that more bacteria were seen with the dentin adhesives used than with the calcium hydroxide. (19,20) The use of GLUMA[R] in the event of a pulp exposure or near pulp exposure is thought to aid in improving the durability of any subsequent bond and eliminate bacterial infection in the applied area because of the gluteraldehyde.

In an in vivo study of primary teeth, glutaraldehyde, ferric sulfate, and formocresol were tested with a self-etching adhesive bonded to dentin for shear bond strength. The ferric sulfate and formocresol affected the shear bond strength adversely, whereas the glutaraldehyde-treated dentin had a significantly higher shear bond strength.

Testing of a dentin primer such as GLUMA[R] used prior to bonding as a wetting agent has shown that GLUMA[R] does not affect the erosion or the compressive strengths of Dycal. (22)

Desensitizing Dentin

The hydrodynamic theory of stimulus transmission in dentin first hypothesized by Brannstrom in 1967 states that "... any stimulus causing an inward or outward movement of dentinal fluid stimulates nerves either in the pulpal one-half of dentin and/ or nerves in the pulp to elicit pain." (23) Capillary movement of dentinal fluid outward will cause activation of the A-delta nerve fibers and elicit a sharp pain response. (24) Application of cold in fluid-filled gaps containing bacteria will elicit this response. The hydrodynamic theory is accepted by experts as the most inclusive theory that explains the phenomenon of sensitivity and pain as well as the effects of microleakage. (25)

Sealing the exposed dentinal tubules, or occluding them, decreases the sensitivity. (26) The amount of dentinal sensitivity is directly related to the size and patency of the dentinal tubules. Occlusion of the tubules either by peri-tubular dentin deposition or the introduction of intra-tubular material reduces the flow of fluid. Irregular reparative dentin does this naturally. Reducing dentin permeability and fluid flow will decrease dentin sensitivity. (27)

GLUMA[R] Desensitizer has been shown to decrease hydraulic conductance of dentinal tubules; (28) decrease demineralization at the site of application; (29) decrease dentin permeability; (30,31,32,33) occlude dentinal tubules to a depth of 200 microm; (34,4) and is effective in humans to stop tooth sensitivity for at least six months, (35,36,37) to a year.38 Changing the viscosity of the GLUMA[R] product into a gel did not alter its effectiveness in decreasing tooth sensitivity. (39)

Effect of GLUMA[R] on Bonding to Dentin

Bonding to dentin is made difficult by the wetness of the vital dentin, the pulpal pressure, the thickness of the remaining dentin, and the position in the dentin relative to the pulp. Caries-affected dentin has mineral deposits in the dentinal tubules. Non-carious cervical lesions have hyper-mineralized dentin and denatured collagen, all of which affect the bond strength of adhesive materials. When self-etching adhesives are tested for bond strength, they lose bond strength after six months due to the effect of the pulpal pressure and the degradation of the bond. (40) Some dentin desensitizers have been recommended to prevent tooth sensitivity but also to block the tubular fluid from affecting the bond strength. (41) GLUMA[R]-treated dentin has higher hardness values, indicating a more thorough polymerization. (42) After etching for a dentin bonding procedure, if GLUMA[R] is used to rewet the dentin prior to bonding, subsequent drying had no effect on the adhesion of the bonding resin. (43) Rewetting the etched dentin with GLUMA[R] can improve mean bond strengths. (44) GLUMA[R] has been shown to either maintain, (45,46) or significantly improve, dentin bond strengths with a variety of dentin bonding agents. (47,48,49) The glutaraldehyde in GLUMA[R] will significantly improve bond strength (49) as well as act as a potent disinfectant even in low concentrations. (50) The gluteraldehyde causes cross-linking between the collagen fibrils found in the intertubular dentin, whereas dentin-bonding systems enmesh the collagen fibrils after etching has opened them. Dentin bonding agents also impregnate the dentinal tubules and form an impermeable layer, isolating the pulp from bacterial infection and preventing dentinal fluid flow. Both actions eliminate postoperative sensitivity.

Effect of GLUMA[R] on Cementation

The use of GLUMA[R] and potassium nitrate was tested in vivo on 75 vital teeth, and both the potassium nitrate and the GLUMA[R] reduced the post-operative sensitivity before cementation. However, the Gluma was more effective post-cementation than the potassium nitrate. (51) GLUMA[R] was tested for retentive strength after cementation using zinc phosphate, glass ionomer, and resin modified glass ionomer cements. GLUMA[R]-treated samples tested highest in retentive strength compared to a control when no desensitizer was used, and highest with resin-modified glass ionomer > glass ionomer > zinc phosphate. (52)

Adhesive luting agents have been tested with the use of GLUMA[R] to desensitize teeth after tooth preparation and before cementation. The results indicate that the GLUMA[R] either did not affect the bond strength (53,54) or actually improved the bond strength after cementation. (55,56,57,58) GLUMA[R] was also able to maintain bond strength after thermocycling and water storage better than the control group where an adhesive cement was used with no GLUMA[R]. (56) The GLUMA[R] samples also maintained their bond strength after chewing simulation better than the control cemented with a resin cement with no GLUMA[R]. (57) Contamination with provisional cement on the dentin did not alter the bond strength of adhesive cements used with GLUMA[R]. (55)

Summary

From this literature review, it is apparent that GLUMA[R] is effective at decreasing tooth sensitivity; either not affecting bond strength or actually improving bond strength when used with various dentin bonding systems as a rewetting agent after acid etching; improving bond strengths when used on caries-affected dentin and killing bacteria on affected dentin and in pulp capping situations; and either maintaining or improving bond strength when used either before temporization or before cementation on teeth prepared for crowns. GLUMA[R] also seems to improve the durability of dentin bonding over time, and after exposure to water, temperature changes, and forces of occlusion.

Disclosure

The author has no financial interest in any dental material companies nor in either publicly traded or privately held dental supply companies.

This article is another installment in the series of articles by Dr. Thomas Larson which demonstrate his and Northwest Dentistry's continuing commitment to presenting topics which address clinical situations and choices our dentist/readers deal with on a daily basis. "I chose Northwest Dentistry," Dr. Larson told us, "because if I were to publish in national journals, many of my former students would never see the articles. They are the audience to which my academic career is devoted. They are they audience that I am trying to affect by publishing best practices." The Northwest Dentistry Editorial Advisory Board feels that to have someone of Dr. Larson's academic experience and credentials providing our journal with his extensive yet concise reviews of the literature is of great value, and we have dedicated a portion of our clinical department to these articles.

References

(1.) Soh G, Henderson LJ. Effect of thermal stress on dentin adhesives used individually and in combination. Clin Mater 1990;6(1):57-64.

(2.) Fujimitsu T, Kato H, Itoh K, Wakumoto S. Adaptation of composites to the dentin cavity wall. Dent Mater J 1989 Dec;8(2):141-6.

(3.) Finger WJ, Balkenhol M. Rewetting strategies for bonding to dry dentin with an acetone-based adhesive. J Adhes Dent 2000 Spring;2(1):51-6.

(4.) Schiipbach P, Lutz F, Finger WJ. Closing of dentinal tubules by Gluma desensitizer. Eur J Oral Sci 1997 Oct;105(5 Pt 1):414-21.

(5.) Davis NR, Risen OM, Pringle GA. Stable, nonreducible cross-links of mature collagen. Biochemistry 1975 May 6;14(9):2,031-6.

(6.) Ritter AV, Swift EJ Jr, Yamauchi M. Effects of phosphoric acid and glutaraldehyde-HEMA on dentin collagen. Eur J Oral Sci 2001 Oct;109(5):348-53.

(7.) Macedo GV, Yamauchi M, Bedran-Russo AK. Effects of chemical cross-linkers on caries-affected dentin bonding. J Dent Res 2009 Dec;88(12):1,096-100. Epub 2009 Nov 5.

(8.) Bedran-Russo AK, Castellan CS, Shinohara MS, Hassan L, Antunes A. Characterization of biomodified dentin matrices for potential preventive and reparative therapies. Acta Biomater 2011 Apr;7(4):1,735-41. Epub 2010 Dec 16.

(9.) Xu C, Wang Y. Cross-linked demineralized dentin maintains its mechanical stability when challenged by bacterial collagenase. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2011 Feb;96(2):242-8. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.31759. Epub 2010 Nov 22.

(10.) Xu C, Wang Y. Collagen cross linking increases its biodegradation resistance in wet dentin bonding. J Adhes Dent 2012 Feb;14(1):11-8. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a21494.

(11.) Bedran-Russo AK, Pashley DH, Agee K, Drummond JL, Miescke KJ. Effects on collagen changes in stiffness of demineralized dentin following application of collagen cross-linkers. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Applied Biomaterials 2008 (86B:330-4).

(12.) Munksgaard EC. Amine-induced polymerization of aqueous HEMA/aldehyde during action as a dentin bonding agent. J Dent Res 1990 Jun;69(6):1,236-9.

(13.) Dos Santos PH, Karol S, Bedran-Russo AK. Long-term nano-mechanical properties of biomodified dentin-resin interface components. J Biomech 2011 Jun 3;44(9):1,691-4. Epub 2011 Apr 30.

(14.) Boksman LL, Swift EJ Jr. Critical appraisal. Current usage of glutaraldehyde/HEMA. J Esthet Restor Dent 2011 Dec;23(6):410-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2011.00490.x. Epub 2011 Nov 17.

(15.) Cassinelli C, Morra M. Atomic force microscopy studies of the interaction of a dentin adhesive with tooth hard tissue. J Biomed Mater Res 1994 Dec;28(12):1,427-31.

(16.) Felton D, Bergenholtz G, Cox CF. Inhibition of bacterial growth under composite restorations following GLUMA pretreatment. J Dent Res 1989 Mar;68(3):491-5.

(17.) Costa CA, Hebling J, Hanks CT. Current status of pulp capping with dentin adhesive systems: a review. Dent Mater 2000 May;16(3):188-97.

(18.) da Silva LA, de Freitas AC, de Carvalho FK, de Queiroz AM, Nelson-Filho P, Porto-Neto ST. Direct pulp capping with a self-etching adhesive system: histopathologic evaluation in dogs' teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009 Jul;108(1):e34-40.

(19.) Dammaschke T, Stratmann U, Fischer RJ, Sagheri D, Schafer E. A histologic investigation of direct pulp capping in rodents with dentin adhesives and calcium hydroxide. Quintessence Int 2010 Apr;41(4):e62-71.

(20.) Bergenholtz G. Evidence for bacterial causation of adverse pulpal responses in resin-based dental restorations. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2000;11(4):467-80.

(21.) Shalan H, Awad S, El-Fallal AA. Influence of pulpotomy medicaments on the ultrastructure and shear bond strength of a self-etch adhesive to primary tooth dentin. Quintessence Int 2012 Jun;43(6):517-23.

(22.) El-Araby A, Al-Jabab A. The influence of some dentin primers on calcium hydroxide lining cement. J Contemp Dent Pract 2005 May 15;6(2):1-9.

(23.) Brannstrom ML, Linden A, Strom A. The hydrodynamics of dentin and pulp fluid. Its significance in relation to dental pain. Caries Res 1967;1:310-17.

(24.) Brannstrom M. Etiology of dentin hypersensitivity. Proc Finn Dent Soc 1992;88 Suppl 1: 7-13.

(25.) Gilliam DG. Mechanisms of stimulus transmission across dentin--a review. J West Soc Periodontol Periodontol Abstr 1995;43(2):53-65.

(26.) Pashley DH, Pashley EL, Carvalho RM, Tay FR. The effects of dentin permeability on restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2002 Apr;46(2):211-45, v-vi.

(27.) Holland GR. Morphological features of dentine and pulp related to dentine sensitivity. Arch Oral Biol 1994;39 Suppl:3S-11S.

(28.) Camps J, Pizant S, Dejou J, Franquin JC. Effects of desensitizing agents on human dentin permeability. Am J Dent. 1998 Dec;11(6):286-90.

(29.) Gernhardt CR, Aschenbach K, Bekes K, Schaller HG. The effect of different desensitizing agents on initial demineralization of human root dentin. Quintessence Int 2005 Oct;36(9):679-85.

(30.) Ishihata H, Kanehira M, Nagai T, Finger WJ, Shimauchi H, Komatsu M. Effect of desensitizing agents on dentin permeability. Am J Dent 2009 Jun;22(3):143-6.

(31.) Camps J, About I, Van Meerbeek B, Franquin JC. Efficiency and cytotoxicity of resin-based desensitizing agents. Am J Dent 2002 Oct;15(5):300-4.

(32.) Duran I, Sengun A, Yildirim T, Ozturk B. In vitro dentine permeability evaluation of HEMA-based (desensitizing) products using split-chamber model following in vivo application in the dog. J Oral Rehabil 2005 Jan;32(1):34-8.

(33.) Kolker JL, Vargas MA, Armstrong SR, Dawson DV. Effect of desensitizing agents on dentin permeability and dentin tubule occlusion. J Adhes Dent 2002 Fall;4(3):211-21.

(34.) Arrais CA, Chan DC, Giannini M. Effects of desensitizing agents on dentinal tubule occlusion. J Appl Oral Sci 2004 Jun;12(2):144-8.

(35.) Brahmbhatt N, Bhavsar N, Sahayata V, Acharya A, Kshatriya P. A double blind controlled trial comparing three treatment modalities for dentin hypersensitivity. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2012 May 1;17(3):e483-90.

(36.) Dondi dall'Orologio G, Lone A, Finger WJ. Clinical evaluation of the role of glutardialdehyde in a one-bottle adhesive. Am J Dent 2002 Oct;15(5):330-4.

(37.) Ehlers V, Ernst CP, Reich M, Kammerer P, Willershausen B. Clinical comparison of gluma and Er:YAG laser treatment of cervically exposed hypersensitive dentin. Am J Dent 2012 Jun;25(3):131-5.

(38.) Guentsch A, Seidler K, Nietzsche S, Hefti AF, Preshaw PM, Watts DC, Jandt KD, Sigusch BW. Biomimetic mineralization: long-term observations in patients with dentin sensitivity. Dent Mater 2012 Apr;28(4):457-64. Epub 2012 Feb 2.

(39.) Ishihata H, Finger WJ, Kanehira M, Shimauchi H, Komatsu M. In vitro dentin permeability after application of GLUMA[R] desensitizer as aqueous solution or aqueous fumed silica dispersion. J Appl Oral Sci 2011 Apr;19(2):147-53.

(40.) Abdalla AI, Elsayed HY, Garcia-Godoy F Effect of hydrostatic pulpal water pressure on microtensile bond strength of self-etch adhesives to dentin. Am J Dent 2008 Aug;21(4):233-8.

(41.) Perdigao J. Dentin bonding-variables related to the clinical situation and the substrate treatment. Dent Mater 2010 Feb;26(2):e24-37. Epub 2009 Dec 14.

(42.) Yanagawa T, Finger WJ. Relationship between degree of polymerization of resin composite and bond strength to Gluma-treated dentin. Am J Dent 1994 Jun;7(3):157-60.

(43.) Finger WJ, Balkenhol M. Rewetting strategies for bonding to dry dentin with an acetone-based adhesive. J Adhes Dent 2000 Spring;2(1):51-6.

(44.) Ritter AV, Heymann HO, Swift EJ Jr, Perdigao J, Rosa BT. Effects of different re-wetting techniques on dentin shear bond strengths. J Esthet Dent 2000;12(2):85-96.

(45.) Reinhardt JW, Stephens NH, Fortin D. Effect of Gluma desensitization on dentin bond strength. Am J Dent 1995 Aug;8(4):170-2.

(46.) Kobler A, Schaller HG, Gernhardt CR. Effects of the desensitizing agents Gluma and Hyposen on the tensile bond strength of dentin adhesives. Am J Dent 2008 Dec;21(6):388-92.

(47.) Salama FS. Gluma bond strength to the dentin of primary molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1994 Fall;19(1):35-40.

(48.) Ravikumar N, Shankar P, Indira R. Shear bond strengths of two dentin bonding agents with two desensitizers: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2011 Jul;14(3):247-51.

(49.) Cilli R, Prakki A, de Araujo PA, Pereira JC. Influence of glutaraldehyde priming on bond strength of an experimental adhesive system applied to wet and dry dentine. J Dent 2009 Mar;37(3):212-8. Epub 2009 Jan 4.

(50.) Schmidlin PR, Zehnder M, Gohnng TN, Waltimo TM. Glutaraldehyde in bonding systems disinfects dentin in vitro. J Adhes Dent 2004 Spring;6(1):61-4.

(51.) Jalalian E, Meraji N, Mirzaei M. A comparison of the efficacy of potassium nitrate and Gluma desensitizer in the reduction of hypersensitivity in teeth with full-crown preparations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009 Jan 1;10(1):66-73.

(52.) Jalandar SS, Pandharinath DS, Arun K, Smita V. Comparison of effect of desensitizing agents on the retention of crowns cemented with luting agents: an in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont 2012 Aug;4(3):127-33. Epub 2012 Aug 28.

(53.) Soeno K, Taira Y, Matsumura H, Atsuta M. Effect of desensitizers on bond strength of adhesive luting agents to dentin. J Oral Rehabil 2001 Dec;28(12):1,122-8.

(54.) Cobb DS, Reinhardt JW, Vargas MA. Effect of HEMA-containing dentin desensitizers on shear bond strength of a resin cement. Am J Dent 1997 Apr;10(2):62-5.

(55.) Sailer I, Oendra AE, Stawarczyk B, Hammerle CH. The effects of desensitizing resin, resin sealing, and provisional cement on the bond strength of dentin luted with self-adhesive and conventional resin cements. J Prosthet Dent 2012 Apr;107(4):252-60.

(56.) Stawarczyk B, Hartmann R, Hartmann L, Roos M, Ozcan M, Sailer I, Hammerle CH. The effect of dentin desensitizer on shear bond strength of conventional and self-adhesive resin luting cements after aging. Oper Dent 2011 Sep Oct;36(5):492-501. Epub 2011 Aug 15.

(57.) Stawarczyk B, Hartmann L, Hartmann R, Roos M, Ender A, Ozcan M, Sailer I, Hammerle CH. Impact of Gluma Desensitizer on the tensile strength of zirconia crowns bonded to dentin: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 2012 Feb;16(1):201-13. Epub 2011 Feb 19.

(58.) Sailer I, Tettamanti S, Stawarczyk B, Fischer J, Hammerle CH. In vitro study of the influence of dentin desensitizing and sealing on the shear bond strength of two universal resin cements. J Adhes Dent 2010 Oct;12(5):381-92. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a17714.

Thomas D. Larson, D.D.S., M.S.D.*

* Dr. Larson is Associate Professor, Department of Restorative Sciences, Division of Operative Dentistry, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455. Email is larso004@umn.edu.

Source Citation

Source Citation   

Gale Document Number: GALE|A329182162