Cargando…

Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION: This trial was designed to evaluate the clinical and radiographic success rates of calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement with and without low level laser therapy (LLLT) and compare them to that of formocresol (FC) and ferric sulfate (FS) in primary molar pulpotomies. METHODS AND MATERI...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ansari, Ghassem, Morovati, Seyyedeh Pouya, Asgary, Saeed
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Iranian Center for Endodontic Research 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5800434/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692828
http://dx.doi.org/10.22037/iej.v13i1.18407
_version_ 1783298204583854080
author Ansari, Ghassem
Morovati, Seyyedeh Pouya
Asgary, Saeed
author_facet Ansari, Ghassem
Morovati, Seyyedeh Pouya
Asgary, Saeed
author_sort Ansari, Ghassem
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This trial was designed to evaluate the clinical and radiographic success rates of calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement with and without low level laser therapy (LLLT) and compare them to that of formocresol (FC) and ferric sulfate (FS) in primary molar pulpotomies. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This randomized clinical trial was conducted on a total of 160 teeth selected from 40 patients aged 3-9 years. Patients with at least four primary molars needing pulpotomy, were included in order to have each tooth assigned randomly in one of the four following groups; FC, FS, CEM, and LLLT/CEM. Six- and twelve-month follow-up periods were conducted in order to enable a clinical and radiographic evaluation of the treated teeth. Collected data were analyzed using Cochran Q Tests. RESULTS: The 12-month clinical success rate for each technique was: FC=100%, FS=95%, CEM=97.5% and LLLT/CEM=100% with no significant differences (P>0.05). Furthermore, 12-month radiographic success rate for each technique was: FC=100%, FS=92.5%, CEM=95% and LLLT/CEM=100% with no significant differences (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Favorable outcomes of four treatment techniques in pulpotomy of primary molar teeth were comparable. CEM with/without LLLT may be considered as a safe and successful pulpotomy treatment modality compared to current conventional methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5800434
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Iranian Center for Endodontic Research
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58004342018-04-24 Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial Ansari, Ghassem Morovati, Seyyedeh Pouya Asgary, Saeed Iran Endod J Original Article INTRODUCTION: This trial was designed to evaluate the clinical and radiographic success rates of calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement with and without low level laser therapy (LLLT) and compare them to that of formocresol (FC) and ferric sulfate (FS) in primary molar pulpotomies. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This randomized clinical trial was conducted on a total of 160 teeth selected from 40 patients aged 3-9 years. Patients with at least four primary molars needing pulpotomy, were included in order to have each tooth assigned randomly in one of the four following groups; FC, FS, CEM, and LLLT/CEM. Six- and twelve-month follow-up periods were conducted in order to enable a clinical and radiographic evaluation of the treated teeth. Collected data were analyzed using Cochran Q Tests. RESULTS: The 12-month clinical success rate for each technique was: FC=100%, FS=95%, CEM=97.5% and LLLT/CEM=100% with no significant differences (P>0.05). Furthermore, 12-month radiographic success rate for each technique was: FC=100%, FS=92.5%, CEM=95% and LLLT/CEM=100% with no significant differences (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Favorable outcomes of four treatment techniques in pulpotomy of primary molar teeth were comparable. CEM with/without LLLT may be considered as a safe and successful pulpotomy treatment modality compared to current conventional methods. Iranian Center for Endodontic Research 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5800434/ /pubmed/29692828 http://dx.doi.org/10.22037/iej.v13i1.18407 Text en This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ansari, Ghassem
Morovati, Seyyedeh Pouya
Asgary, Saeed
Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_short Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial
title_sort evaluation of four pulpotomy techniques in primary molars: a randomized controlled trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5800434/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692828
http://dx.doi.org/10.22037/iej.v13i1.18407
work_keys_str_mv AT ansarighassem evaluationoffourpulpotomytechniquesinprimarymolarsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT morovatiseyyedehpouya evaluationoffourpulpotomytechniquesinprimarymolarsarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT asgarysaeed evaluationoffourpulpotomytechniquesinprimarymolarsarandomizedcontrolledtrial