Cargando…

Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND: The objective of this clinical study was to prospectively compare the clinical and radiographic success rates of Biodentine(TM) pulpotomies versus formocresol pulpotomies in children vital primary molars. METHODS: A randomized, split–mouth study design was used with a sample of 37 health...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: El Meligy, Omar Abd El Sadek, Alamoudi, Najlaa Mohamed, Allazzam, Sulaiman Mohamed, El-Housseiny, Azza Abdel Mohsen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6322259/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30612569
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0702-4
_version_ 1783385584230727680
author El Meligy, Omar Abd El Sadek
Alamoudi, Najlaa Mohamed
Allazzam, Sulaiman Mohamed
El-Housseiny, Azza Abdel Mohsen
author_facet El Meligy, Omar Abd El Sadek
Alamoudi, Najlaa Mohamed
Allazzam, Sulaiman Mohamed
El-Housseiny, Azza Abdel Mohsen
author_sort El Meligy, Omar Abd El Sadek
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The objective of this clinical study was to prospectively compare the clinical and radiographic success rates of Biodentine(TM) pulpotomies versus formocresol pulpotomies in children vital primary molars. METHODS: A randomized, split–mouth study design was used with a sample of 37 healthy children aged 4– to 8–year–old. A total of 56 pairs (112 teeth) of carious primary teeth, 1 pair per child, were selected for treatment. One tooth from each pair was randomly assigned to either the Biodentine(TM) pulpotomy group or the formocresol pulpotomy group. Children were followed–up at 3, 6 and 12 months for clinical evaluation and at 6 and 12 months for radiographic evaluation. Data were collected, tabulated and analyzed using Fisher exact and McNemar tests. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: At 12 months, the clinical success rates of both Biodentine(TM) and formocresol groups were 100%, while the radiographic success rates for Biodentine(TM) and formocresol groups were 100% and 98.1%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups (P=1). The only observed radiographic failure was furcal radiolucency in the formocresol group at 12–month interval. Pulp canal obliteration was radiographically observed in 10/56 (17.9%) and 7/56 (12.5%) cases in the Biodentine(TM) and formocresol groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both Biodentine(TM) and formocresol pulpotomy techniques demonstrated favorable clinical and radiographic outcomes over a 12-month period without any significant difference. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on NCT03779698. Date of Registration: 18 December 2018.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6322259
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63222592019-01-09 Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial El Meligy, Omar Abd El Sadek Alamoudi, Najlaa Mohamed Allazzam, Sulaiman Mohamed El-Housseiny, Azza Abdel Mohsen BMC Oral Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The objective of this clinical study was to prospectively compare the clinical and radiographic success rates of Biodentine(TM) pulpotomies versus formocresol pulpotomies in children vital primary molars. METHODS: A randomized, split–mouth study design was used with a sample of 37 healthy children aged 4– to 8–year–old. A total of 56 pairs (112 teeth) of carious primary teeth, 1 pair per child, were selected for treatment. One tooth from each pair was randomly assigned to either the Biodentine(TM) pulpotomy group or the formocresol pulpotomy group. Children were followed–up at 3, 6 and 12 months for clinical evaluation and at 6 and 12 months for radiographic evaluation. Data were collected, tabulated and analyzed using Fisher exact and McNemar tests. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: At 12 months, the clinical success rates of both Biodentine(TM) and formocresol groups were 100%, while the radiographic success rates for Biodentine(TM) and formocresol groups were 100% and 98.1%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups (P=1). The only observed radiographic failure was furcal radiolucency in the formocresol group at 12–month interval. Pulp canal obliteration was radiographically observed in 10/56 (17.9%) and 7/56 (12.5%) cases in the Biodentine(TM) and formocresol groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both Biodentine(TM) and formocresol pulpotomy techniques demonstrated favorable clinical and radiographic outcomes over a 12-month period without any significant difference. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on NCT03779698. Date of Registration: 18 December 2018. BioMed Central 2019-01-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6322259/ /pubmed/30612569 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0702-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and 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/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
El Meligy, Omar Abd El Sadek
Alamoudi, Najlaa Mohamed
Allazzam, Sulaiman Mohamed
El-Housseiny, Azza Abdel Mohsen
Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial
title Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial
title_full Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial
title_fullStr Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial
title_short Biodentine(TM) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial
title_sort biodentine(tm) versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6322259/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30612569
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0702-4
work_keys_str_mv AT elmeligyomarabdelsadek biodentinetmversusformocresolpulpotomytechniqueinprimarymolarsa12monthrandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial
AT alamoudinajlaamohamed biodentinetmversusformocresolpulpotomytechniqueinprimarymolarsa12monthrandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial
AT allazzamsulaimanmohamed biodentinetmversusformocresolpulpotomytechniqueinprimarymolarsa12monthrandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial
AT elhousseinyazzaabdelmohsen biodentinetmversusformocresolpulpotomytechniqueinprimarymolarsa12monthrandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial