Open AccessA clinical and histopathological evaluation of different pulpotomy agents in primary teeth
Author(s) -
Maha Abdul Kareem
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
magallaẗ kulliyyaẗ al-rāfidayn al-ǧāmi'aẗ al-'ulūm/maǧallaẗ kulliyyaẗ al-rāfidayn al-ǧāmiʻaẗ li-l-ʻulūm
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2790-2293
pISSN - 1681-6870
DOI - 10.55562/jrucs.v29i1.382
Subject(s) - medicine , pulpotomy , molar , pulp necrosis , necrosis , dentistry , abscess , pulp (tooth) , surgery , pathology
The purpose of this investigation is to compare the response of primary teeth clinically and histopathologically to vital pulp therapy using formocresol (FC), Ferric sulfate (FS), and Pulpotec (PD). A total of 60 primary molars were treated in 43 children aged 7-9 years. Twenty primary molars received FC, and an equal number received FS, and PD by random selection. Clinical evaluations were performed at 3 and 6 months recall for the whole samples. Histopathological evaluations were carried at 6 months for the teeth indicated for extraction (total 30) as part of the orthodontic treatment. Statistical analysis using Z-test was performed on the data to determine significant differences between the groups. Three and six months results showed a highly significant difference (P< 0.01) between the tested materials in most clinical findings, while histopathologically after 6-months in the FC group mild inflammation was seen in two cases, severe inflammation in three cases, necrosis in two, and abscess in one case. In the FS group mild in one case, severe in three cases, necrosis in one case, and abscess in two cases, finally in PD group mild inflammation was seen in one case, severe in one case, necrosis in one case, with no abscess formation in any case. Clinical and histopathological evaluations showed that Pulpotec (PD) can be considered as a replacement for FC and FS.