Cargando…

A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study

BACKGROUND: Pulpotomy is the most common pulp treatment of primary molars, where surgical amputation of infected coronal pulp results in preserving the vitality and function of radicular pulp. With introduction of newer materials, the emphasis has shifted towards regeneration, in this scenario; nove...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goinka, Chanchal, Galla, Pavan Kumar, Madhavi, K., Malempet, Anusha, Suryadevara, Sowmya, Reddy, Kola Srikanth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9937932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820132
_version_ 1784890534163120128
author Goinka, Chanchal
Galla, Pavan Kumar
Madhavi, K.
Malempet, Anusha
Suryadevara, Sowmya
Reddy, Kola Srikanth
author_facet Goinka, Chanchal
Galla, Pavan Kumar
Madhavi, K.
Malempet, Anusha
Suryadevara, Sowmya
Reddy, Kola Srikanth
author_sort Goinka, Chanchal
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pulpotomy is the most common pulp treatment of primary molars, where surgical amputation of infected coronal pulp results in preserving the vitality and function of radicular pulp. With introduction of newer materials, the emphasis has shifted towards regeneration, in this scenario; novel materials such as platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) and propolis (PS) have been considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-blind in vivo study; ninety human primary teeth from children aged between 5 and 10 years were divided into three equal groups in whom pulpotomy procedure was performed and they were recalled after 3- and 6-month interval for histological evaluation. Observations were subjected to statistical analysis using Pearson's Chi-square test. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the three materials with respect to inflammatory response, soft-tissue organization, and dentin bridge formation (P > 0.05). Majority of the samples in both growth factor and propolis exhibited dentin bridges at the interface of the exposed pulp, bringing or attempting to bridge the site exposed to the pulpotomy material. The ability of the material to evoke a foreign and inflammatory cell response in the pulpal tissue was not significant. The samples of both formocresol and growth factor group showed signs of pulpal necrosis which revealed the presence of a mild necrotic zone in one specimen at 3 months. One specimen from the propolis group showed mild areas of necrosis at the end of 6 months, where none of the specimens in the growth factor group showed areas of necrosis at the end of 6 months. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study showed a positive outcome for growth factor and propolis groups. Further clinical trials with a larger sample size and long-term review have to be conducted for the material to be used widely.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9937932
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99379322023-02-19 A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study Goinka, Chanchal Galla, Pavan Kumar Madhavi, K. Malempet, Anusha Suryadevara, Sowmya Reddy, Kola Srikanth Dent Res J (Isfahan) Original Article BACKGROUND: Pulpotomy is the most common pulp treatment of primary molars, where surgical amputation of infected coronal pulp results in preserving the vitality and function of radicular pulp. With introduction of newer materials, the emphasis has shifted towards regeneration, in this scenario; novel materials such as platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) and propolis (PS) have been considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-blind in vivo study; ninety human primary teeth from children aged between 5 and 10 years were divided into three equal groups in whom pulpotomy procedure was performed and they were recalled after 3- and 6-month interval for histological evaluation. Observations were subjected to statistical analysis using Pearson's Chi-square test. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the three materials with respect to inflammatory response, soft-tissue organization, and dentin bridge formation (P > 0.05). Majority of the samples in both growth factor and propolis exhibited dentin bridges at the interface of the exposed pulp, bringing or attempting to bridge the site exposed to the pulpotomy material. The ability of the material to evoke a foreign and inflammatory cell response in the pulpal tissue was not significant. The samples of both formocresol and growth factor group showed signs of pulpal necrosis which revealed the presence of a mild necrotic zone in one specimen at 3 months. One specimen from the propolis group showed mild areas of necrosis at the end of 6 months, where none of the specimens in the growth factor group showed areas of necrosis at the end of 6 months. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study showed a positive outcome for growth factor and propolis groups. Further clinical trials with a larger sample size and long-term review have to be conducted for the material to be used widely. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9937932/ /pubmed/36820132 Text en Copyright: © 2023 Dental Research Journal https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Goinka, Chanchal
Galla, Pavan Kumar
Madhavi, K.
Malempet, Anusha
Suryadevara, Sowmya
Reddy, Kola Srikanth
A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study
title A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study
title_full A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study
title_fullStr A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study
title_full_unstemmed A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study
title_short A histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: An in vivo study
title_sort histopathological comparison of formocresol, propolis, and growth factor as pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth: an in vivo study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9937932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820132
work_keys_str_mv AT goinkachanchal ahistopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT gallapavankumar ahistopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT madhavik ahistopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT malempetanusha ahistopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT suryadevarasowmya ahistopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT reddykolasrikanth ahistopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT goinkachanchal histopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT gallapavankumar histopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT madhavik histopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT malempetanusha histopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT suryadevarasowmya histopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy
AT reddykolasrikanth histopathologicalcomparisonofformocresolpropolisandgrowthfactoraspulpotomymedicamentsinprimaryteethaninvivostudy