Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025
Assessing the Success of a Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and a Pre-Mixed Bioceramic in Mature Teeth With Irreversible Pulpitis With Full Pulpotomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Suresh Sarang, Kalhoro Feroze A, Rani Priya, Memon Mahwish
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic success of MTA versus EBRRM in pulpotomy of permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis without apical periodontitis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Clinical and radiographic assessments were conducted at baseline, 6 days, 6 weeks, and 6 months. After administration of anesthesia and coronal pulp removal, pulp was capped with MTA or Endo Sequence Bioceramic Root Repair, followed by restoration with a glass ionomer and resin composite.
RESULTS: The overall success rate for pulpotomy was 71.9%, with MTA and the bioceramic showing success rates of 32.8% and 39.1%, respectively. There was no significant relationship with the type of cavity and failure of pulpotomy.
CONCLUSIONS: MTA and EBBRRM are both practical choices for pulpotomy and there is no notable difference between them in the success rate and pain level. EBBRRM may be more effective in Class 1 cavities than in Class 2 cavities.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Clinical and radiographic assessments were conducted at baseline, 6 days, 6 weeks, and 6 months. After administration of anesthesia and coronal pulp removal, pulp was capped with MTA or Endo Sequence Bioceramic Root Repair, followed by restoration with a glass ionomer and resin composite.
RESULTS: The overall success rate for pulpotomy was 71.9%, with MTA and the bioceramic showing success rates of 32.8% and 39.1%, respectively. There was no significant relationship with the type of cavity and failure of pulpotomy.
CONCLUSIONS: MTA and EBBRRM are both practical choices for pulpotomy and there is no notable difference between them in the success rate and pain level. EBBRRM may be more effective in Class 1 cavities than in Class 2 cavities.