Cargando…
Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study
INTRODUCTION: The study was performed to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of chlorhexidine (CHX) polymer scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and formocresol for vital primary pulp therapy—a randomized clinical study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 primary molars were included from...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10367291/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37496952 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2615 |
_version_ | 1785077357291241472 |
---|---|
author | Goel, Nancy Kumar, Arun Singhal, Ruchi Jha, Shruti Namdev, Ritu Rani, Reena |
author_facet | Goel, Nancy Kumar, Arun Singhal, Ruchi Jha, Shruti Namdev, Ritu Rani, Reena |
author_sort | Goel, Nancy |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The study was performed to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of chlorhexidine (CHX) polymer scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and formocresol for vital primary pulp therapy—a randomized clinical study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 primary molars were included from children aged between 6 and 8 years in this randomized clinical study based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and were randomly allocated into three groups (group I—CHX polymer scaffold, group II—3Mixtatin, and group III—formocresol. Pulpotomy was performed in a vital cariously exposed primary tooth with healthy periodontium where their retention is more beneficial than extraction. Subjects were followed up at 1, 3, and 6 months for clinical and radiographic evaluations. RESULTS: At 6 months of follow-up, the overall success rate of pulpotomy in groups I, II, and III was 56.41, 71.05, and 60.52% in each group, respectively. Nonsignificant difference (p > 0.05) was seen during intergroup comparison. CONCLUSION: However, among the three materials used in this study, 3mixtatin comparatively had better results. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Goel N. Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(3):478-482. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10367291 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103672912023-07-26 Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study Goel, Nancy Kumar, Arun Singhal, Ruchi Jha, Shruti Namdev, Ritu Rani, Reena Int J Clin Pediatr Dent Original Research INTRODUCTION: The study was performed to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of chlorhexidine (CHX) polymer scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and formocresol for vital primary pulp therapy—a randomized clinical study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 primary molars were included from children aged between 6 and 8 years in this randomized clinical study based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and were randomly allocated into three groups (group I—CHX polymer scaffold, group II—3Mixtatin, and group III—formocresol. Pulpotomy was performed in a vital cariously exposed primary tooth with healthy periodontium where their retention is more beneficial than extraction. Subjects were followed up at 1, 3, and 6 months for clinical and radiographic evaluations. RESULTS: At 6 months of follow-up, the overall success rate of pulpotomy in groups I, II, and III was 56.41, 71.05, and 60.52% in each group, respectively. Nonsignificant difference (p > 0.05) was seen during intergroup comparison. CONCLUSION: However, among the three materials used in this study, 3mixtatin comparatively had better results. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Goel N. Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(3):478-482. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10367291/ /pubmed/37496952 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2615 Text en Copyright © 2023; The Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/© The Author(s). 2023 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Goel, Nancy Kumar, Arun Singhal, Ruchi Jha, Shruti Namdev, Ritu Rani, Reena Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study |
title | Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study |
title_full | Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study |
title_fullStr | Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study |
title_short | Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of chlorhexidine polymer scaffold, 3mixtatin, and formocresol for vital primary pulp therapy: a randomized 6-month clinical study |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10367291/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37496952 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2615 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT goelnancy comparativeevaluationofchlorhexidinepolymerscaffold3mixtatinandformocresolforvitalprimarypulptherapyarandomized6monthclinicalstudy AT kumararun comparativeevaluationofchlorhexidinepolymerscaffold3mixtatinandformocresolforvitalprimarypulptherapyarandomized6monthclinicalstudy AT singhalruchi comparativeevaluationofchlorhexidinepolymerscaffold3mixtatinandformocresolforvitalprimarypulptherapyarandomized6monthclinicalstudy AT jhashruti comparativeevaluationofchlorhexidinepolymerscaffold3mixtatinandformocresolforvitalprimarypulptherapyarandomized6monthclinicalstudy AT namdevritu comparativeevaluationofchlorhexidinepolymerscaffold3mixtatinandformocresolforvitalprimarypulptherapyarandomized6monthclinicalstudy AT ranireena comparativeevaluationofchlorhexidinepolymerscaffold3mixtatinandformocresolforvitalprimarypulptherapyarandomized6monthclinicalstudy |