The journal of contemporary dental practice · 2021
Assessment of Clinical and Radiographic Success Rate of Formocresol-based Pulpotomy versus Collagen-based Pulpotomy: An In Vivo Study.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Anandan Vasanthakumari, Inbanathan Jaiganesh, Saket Parthiban, Krishnamoorthy Vivek, Gandhi Shanmugavadivel, Chandrababu Vignesh Krishnapillai
Аннотация
AIM: The aim of the study is (a) To use collagen as a pulpotomy material in comparison with the gold standard formocresol-based pulpotomy, (b) to assess the clinical and radiographic success rate of formocresol pulpotomy and collagen-based pulpotomy, and (c) to compare the success rate of formocresol-based pulpotomy and collagen-based pulpotomy over a definitive interval of time.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Totally 30 primary first or second molars indicated for pulpotomy after confirming with the operative diagnosis were taken as samples for this study. This split-mouth technique consists of two groups: Group 1-formocresol pulpotomy (n = 15), and group 2-collagen-based pulpotomy (n = 15). Both the procedures were done in the same patient on regular appointments. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were taken. The children were recalled for clinical and radiographic follow-up at 2, 4, and 6 months. The success of the procedure was assessed based on clinical signs (pain, tenderness to percussion, abscess, swelling, fistula, and pathologic mobility) and radiographic findings (radicular radiolucency, internal and external root resorption, periodontal ligament (PDL) space widening, and furcation radiolucency). The Chi-square test was used to compare the differences between the groups.
RESULT: The overall success rate for formocresol pulpotomy (n = 15) was 14, 13, and 10 for the second-, fourth-, and sixth-month review period, respectively. For collagen pulpotomy group (n = 15), the overall success rate was 14, 14, and 14 for the second-, fourth-, and sixth-month review period, respectively. The obtained data from the overall success rate were subjected to statistical analysis, and chi-square test was used. The p-value less than 0.1 was considered a statistically significant result. The chi-square value for the fourth- and sixth-month review was 0.37 and 3.33, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Statistically significant value was obtained from the sixth-month review period (p <0.1), which describes that the overall success rate was better for the collagen pulpotomy group when compared with the formocresol pulpotomy group.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Collagen had proven to be a very good alternative for formocresol, its biocompatibility, and regenerative efficiency and is a benchmark for a better clinical success rate in dentistry. However, its implication in pulpotomy should be subjected to further comparative research study on mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), Biodentine, etc. Keywords: Collagen-based pulpotomy, Formocresol-based pulpotomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Totally 30 primary first or second molars indicated for pulpotomy after confirming with the operative diagnosis were taken as samples for this study. This split-mouth technique consists of two groups: Group 1-formocresol pulpotomy (n = 15), and group 2-collagen-based pulpotomy (n = 15). Both the procedures were done in the same patient on regular appointments. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were taken. The children were recalled for clinical and radiographic follow-up at 2, 4, and 6 months. The success of the procedure was assessed based on clinical signs (pain, tenderness to percussion, abscess, swelling, fistula, and pathologic mobility) and radiographic findings (radicular radiolucency, internal and external root resorption, periodontal ligament (PDL) space widening, and furcation radiolucency). The Chi-square test was used to compare the differences between the groups.
RESULT: The overall success rate for formocresol pulpotomy (n = 15) was 14, 13, and 10 for the second-, fourth-, and sixth-month review period, respectively. For collagen pulpotomy group (n = 15), the overall success rate was 14, 14, and 14 for the second-, fourth-, and sixth-month review period, respectively. The obtained data from the overall success rate were subjected to statistical analysis, and chi-square test was used. The p-value less than 0.1 was considered a statistically significant result. The chi-square value for the fourth- and sixth-month review was 0.37 and 3.33, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Statistically significant value was obtained from the sixth-month review period (p <0.1), which describes that the overall success rate was better for the collagen pulpotomy group when compared with the formocresol pulpotomy group.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Collagen had proven to be a very good alternative for formocresol, its biocompatibility, and regenerative efficiency and is a benchmark for a better clinical success rate in dentistry. However, its implication in pulpotomy should be subjected to further comparative research study on mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), Biodentine, etc. Keywords: Collagen-based pulpotomy, Formocresol-based pulpotomy.