International Journal of Applied Dental Sciences
2019, Vol. 5 Issue 1, Part B
Comparative evaluation of success of pulpotomy in primary molars treated with Formocresol, Pulpotec and Biodentine- 6 month follow up study
AUTHOR(S): Dr. Bhawna Verma, Dr. Shantanu Choudhari, Dr. Swati Goyal, Dr. Gaurav Vispute, Dr. Kanwaljeet Bharti and Dr. Suchita Choudhari
Background: Pulpotomy is generally performed with Formocresol in primary molars despite its disadvantages like cytotoxicity, necrosis, mutagenic and carcinogenic potential. Hence new materials like Pulpotec and Biodentine were used in this study to compare the success rates of the three materials.
Aim: To evaluate and compare the radiographic and clinical success of formocresol, pulpotec and biodentine as pulpotomy medicaments in primary molars.
Methodology: The study was conducted on 90 primary molars in children aged between 4-9 years. The pulpotomy procedure was performed on the 90 selected teeth which were randomly divided into three groups according to the pulp dressing material used. The patients were recalled again for clinical and radiographic evaluation after 3 and 6 months. The data was statistically analysed using Chi- square test (P<0.05) and Anova single factor test to perform comparisons between the groups.
Result: At the end of 6 months, clinical success was 100% for all the three groups. Whereas radiographic success was 96.7% for formocresol and 100 % for both pulpotec and biodentine group.
Conclusion: This study showed that Pulpotec and Biodentine used for primary teeth pulpotomy has good success rates on follow-up; and hence can be used as alternatives to Formocresol.
Pages: 77-82 | 501 Views 26 Downloads
How to cite this article:
Dr. Bhawna Verma, Dr. Shantanu Choudhari, Dr. Swati Goyal, Dr. Gaurav Vispute, Dr. Kanwaljeet Bharti and Dr. Suchita Choudhari. Comparative evaluation of success of pulpotomy in primary molars treated with Formocresol, Pulpotec and Biodentine- 6 month follow up study. International Journal of Applied Dental Sciences. 2019; 5(1): 77-82.