Abstract
BackgroundPulpotomy is the surgical removal of the entire coronal pulp with preservation of the radicular pulp vitality. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic success of pulpotomy of primary molars using two materials, biodentine and calcium hydroxide.MethodsRecords of 400 primary molars in 360 paediatric participants (mean age: 7.5 ± 1.6 years, ranging from 5 to 9 years) with dental caries who required pulp therapy were included in this study. Biodentine was used on 200 teeth, and calcium hydroxide (CH) was used on another 200 teeth, as a pulpotomy material. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed after 9 and 18 months. Statistical analysis was evaluated with the chi-squared test, and the level of significance was set at p < 0.05.ResultsThe treatment success with CH was 85.5% after 9 months and 79.5% after 18 months, while the success rate of biodentine was 94% after 9 months and 89.5% after 18 months. The statistical analysis with the Chi-squared test showed that the clinical and radiographic success rate with biodentine was significantly higher than CH (p < 0.05).ConclusionsBiodentine exhibited a higher clinical and radiographic success rate compared to CH. However, besides the clinical results, biodentine has some disadvantages, such as higher costs, compared to CH.
Highlights
Pulpotomy is the surgical removal of the entire coronal pulp with preservation of the radicular pulp vitality
The main findings of the present study showed that clinical and radiographic failures were lower in the group treated with biodentine in comparison to the group treated with calcium hydroxide (CH)
The findings of this study show that biodentine exhibits a higher clinical and radiographic success after 9 and 18 months compared to CH
Summary
Pulpotomy is the surgical removal of the entire coronal pulp with preservation of the radicular pulp vitality. Pulpotomy is indicated in cases of exposed vital pulps by the caries process, by accident during cavity preparation, or as a result of injury and fracture of the tooth in primary teeth [4]. It is not indicated for primary teeth with internal resorption, furcal perforation, insufficient root structure, and periradicular pathosis that may alter permanent successor eruption [5].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
