Clinical Evaluation of Success of Primary Teeth Pulpotomy Using Mineral Trioxide Aggregate®, Laser and Biodentine™- An In Vivo Study

• Main Authors: Krothapalli Niranjani, Madhu Ghanshyam Prasad, Aron Arun Kumar Vasa, Gaddam Divya, Mukesh Singh Thakur, Kanithi Saujanya
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: JCDR Research and Publications Private Limited 2015-04-01
• Series: Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research
• Subjects: caries; formocresol; primary molars; pulp therapy
• Online Access: https://jcdr.net/articles/PDF/5823/13153_CE[Ra_Ash]_F(P)_PF1(PAK)_PFA(AK)_PF2(PAG).pdf

Introduction: Pulpotomy technique basically consists of removing the coronal pulp and fixing the radicular pulp with a medicament. It is the most widely accepted clinical procedure for treating primary teeth with coronal pulp inflammation caused by caries with no involvement of the radicular pulp. Aim: To evaluate the success and efficacy of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA), Lasers and Biodentine as pulpotomy agents both clinically and radiographically. Materials and Methods: In the present study, 60 primary molars in children whose pulpal status warranted pulpotomy were selected and randomly assigned into three groups that included MTA, Laser and Biodentine allocating 20 teeth to each group. The pulpotomy procedure was then performed on all selected teeth followed by restoration with stainless steel crowns. Later the patients were recalled for 3 months and 6 months for clinical and radiographic evaluation. Results: Statistical analysis was done using Fisher exact test to determine pair wise comparison of three agents with respect to clinical and radiographic criteria. Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA, Mc Nemars test was applied to evaluate the efficacy of each agent between 3 months and 6 months. The results showed that maximum success rate was found in MTA group. However, the comparison between three groups was statistically not significant (p>0.05). Conclusion: Pulpotomies performed with either MTA, Laser or Biodentine are equally efficient with similar clinical/radiographic success and hence can be considered as alternatives to Formocresol.