Use of Non-Vital Pulp Therapies in Primary Teeth.

Purpose: To present an evidence-based guideline for non-vital pulp therapies due to deep caries or trauma in primary teeth.

Methods

The authors, working with the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis for studies on non-vital primary teeth resulting from trauma or caries and used the GRADE approach to assess level of certainty of evidence for clinical recommendations.

Results

GRADE was assessed from high to very low. Comparing teeth with/without root resorption, pulpectomy success was better (P<0.001) in those without preoperative root resorption. Zinc oxide plus iodoform plus calcium hydroxide ([ZO/iodoform/CH]; Endoflas TM ) and zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) pulpectomy success did not differ from iodoform (iodoform plus calcium hydroxide; VitapexTM, MetapexTM) (P=0.55) after 18-months; however, ZO/iodoform/CH and ZOE success rates remained near 90 percent while iodoform was 71 percent or less. Network analysis ratings showed ZO/iodoform/CH and ZOE better than iodoform. Lesion sterilization tissue repair (LSTR) was better (P<0.001) than pulpectomy in teeth with preoperative root resorption, but pulpectomy results were better (P=0.09) if roots were intact. Rotary instrumentation of root canals was significantly faster (P<0.001) than manual, but the quality of fill did not differ (P=0.09) and both had comparable success. Network analysis ranked ZO/iodoform/CH the best, ZOE second, and iodoform lowest at 18 months. Success rates were not impacted by method of obturation or root length determination, type of tooth, number of visits, irrigants, smear layer removal, or timing/type of final restoration.

Conclusions

Pulpectomy 18-month success rates supported ZO/iodoform/CH and ZOE pulpectomy over iodoform. LSTR had limited indication for teeth with resorbed roots and requires close monitoring.