Pediatric dentistry · 2012
Pulpotomy versus pulpectomy for carious vital primary incisors: randomized controlled trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное 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.
Howley Brega, Seale N Sue, McWhorter Alton G, Kerins Carolyn, Boozer Kent B, Lindsey Donna
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective, randomized, split-mouth investigation was to compare the success rates of formocresol pulpotomies (FC) and Vitapex(®) pulpectomies (RCT) in asymptomatic carious vital primary incisors.
METHODS: Matched contralateral pairs of asymptomatic, carious, vital primary incisors were randomized to receive FC or RCT by 2 standardized operators and restored with stainless steel crowns. Seventy-four incisors were followed clinically and radiographically for up to 23 months. Two standardized examiners evaluated radiographic findings using separate pulpotomy and pulpectomy scales (modified Zurn/Seale).
RESULTS: Incisors present at each interval (5-9, 10-14, and 15-23 months) showed no clinical failures. One FC incisor was lost early and counted as a failure. Though not significantly different, there were higher numbers of successful radiographic outcomes for FC than RCT at each observation interval. Cumulative final radiographic success was 89% (n=33) for FC and 73% (n=27) for RCT. (P=.11).
CONCLUSIONS: Anecdotal claims that pulpotomies are unsuccessful in primary incisors are unfounded. There was no significant difference in success rates of pulpotomies and pulpectomies in the pulp treatment of asymptomatic vital primary incisors. Intracanal resorption of Vitapex(®) was seen in all pulpectomy teeth and did not affect pulpectomy outcome.
METHODS: Matched contralateral pairs of asymptomatic, carious, vital primary incisors were randomized to receive FC or RCT by 2 standardized operators and restored with stainless steel crowns. Seventy-four incisors were followed clinically and radiographically for up to 23 months. Two standardized examiners evaluated radiographic findings using separate pulpotomy and pulpectomy scales (modified Zurn/Seale).
RESULTS: Incisors present at each interval (5-9, 10-14, and 15-23 months) showed no clinical failures. One FC incisor was lost early and counted as a failure. Though not significantly different, there were higher numbers of successful radiographic outcomes for FC than RCT at each observation interval. Cumulative final radiographic success was 89% (n=33) for FC and 73% (n=27) for RCT. (P=.11).
CONCLUSIONS: Anecdotal claims that pulpotomies are unsuccessful in primary incisors are unfounded. There was no significant difference in success rates of pulpotomies and pulpectomies in the pulp treatment of asymptomatic vital primary incisors. Intracanal resorption of Vitapex(®) was seen in all pulpectomy teeth and did not affect pulpectomy outcome.