Cargando…
Evaluation of Chitosan and Ferric Sulphate as Pulpotomy Agents in Primary Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Trial
INTRODUCTION: Preservation of healthy pulp tissue is detrimental for the function and vitality of carious primary teeth. Several hemostatic agents used for pulpotomy in primary teeth showed adverse effects on viable surrounding structures. AIMS: To assess the clinical and radiographic success of chi...
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/PMC10373769/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37519981 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2514 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: Preservation of healthy pulp tissue is detrimental for the function and vitality of carious primary teeth. Several hemostatic agents used for pulpotomy in primary teeth showed adverse effects on viable surrounding structures. AIMS: To assess the clinical and radiographic success of chitosan (CH) pulpotomy in primary molars and to compare it with ferric sulphate (FS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 carious lower primary second molars in 5–9 years children are selected for conventional pulpotomy technique. Over radicular stumps, FS is placed for 15 seconds in the control group, and CH for 4–5 minutes in the study group, followed by intermediate restoration (IRM). Intraoral periapical radiographs were taken immediately after 1 week and after 3rd and 6th months. The clinical and radiographic success rate is assessed and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Chitosan (CH) showed a 65% radiographical and 100% clinical success rate, and FS showed 55 and 95%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Chitosan (CH) showed better results than FS as a pulpotomy agent in primary teeth. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Guguloth S, Jamnapalli SR, Patloth T, et al. Evaluation of Chitosan and Ferric Sulphate as Pulpotomy Agents in Primary Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(2):223-226. |
---|