Discussion
TMD, inflammation, tooth, pain
ADVERSE EVENTS, MINOR, ADHESION, INFLAMMATION
This randomized controlled trial failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of PJD treatment to TMD treatment. However, according to the mean improvement rate of DH symptoms, PJD treatment was as effective as TMD treatment.This study was conducted according to the guidelines for clinical trials of DH, and the endpoints were set following the guideline [The improvement rate of air pain was 69.0% for PJD treatment, which was comparable to that reported in our previous study (71.3%) [It should be noted that VAS is complicated to use, especially with elderly people, and is associated with higher error rates [The reason why we failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of PJD compared with TMD was that the treatment procedure was performed more strictly than reported methods. We used a rubber dam on test teeth, whereas other studies performed the procedure with simple moisture sealing [The TMD group showed a plateau state after 4 weeks, whereas the PJD group showed a sustained improvement trend throughout the entire observation period. The HAP layer formed by the PJD-UNIT was firmly deposited on dentin and some small HAP particles entered the dentine tubules [Akatsuka suggested that the dentinal tubules are a calcium-rich environment, and there is a strong possibility that HA particles deposited inside the tubules could enter a recalcification process that generates a strong and permanent adhesion between the biomaterial and the tooth [Although minor adverse events were observed, they were mild and did not require treatment. There are a few studies on adverse events encountered during DH treatment. It was reported that desensitizer containing a high concentration of calcium sodium phosphosilicate could cause gingival inflammation [