Comparative Evaluation of Clinical and Radiographic Success of Formocresol, Propolis, Turmeric Gel, and Calcium Hydroxide on Pulpotomized Primary Molars: A Preliminary Study

Shivayogi M Hugar, Pratibha Kukreja, Shweta S Hugar, Niraj Gokhale, Harsha Assudani, Shivayogi M Hugar, Pratibha Kukreja, Shweta S Hugar, Niraj Gokhale, Harsha Assudani

Abstract

Aims: Despite various advents in technology, the present era marks a shift to phytotherapeutics and alternative modalities to conventional endodontic treatments. Newer endodontic modalities have been developed inculcating the ancient system of medicine. The present study was done to compare and evaluate the clinical pulp response and radiographic signs after pulpotomy in four groups of primary molar teeth treated with formocresol (control), propolis extract, turmeric gel, and calcium hydroxide respectively.

Materials and methods: Following ethical clearance, 90 primary molar teeth in 45 pediatric patients, aged between 4 and 9 years, were selected for pulpotomy. These were then randomly divided by split-mouth technique into two groups as experimental (propolis extract/turmeric gel/calcium hydroxide) and control (formocresol) groups. The patients were followed up for 6 months for clinical and radiographic signs and symptoms to evaluate the success of treatment.

Results: A comparable clinical and radiographic success rate was seen with all experimental groups as compared to the control (formocresol) group.

Conclusion: With concerns about the safety of formocresol appearing in the dental and medical literature for more than 20 years, the materials used in this study can be considered as promising alternatives for formocresol in pediatric endodontic treatment.

How to cite this article: Hugar SM, Kukreja P, Hugar SS, Gokhale N, Assudani H. Comparative Evaluation of Clinical and Radiographic Success of Formocresol, Propolis, Turmeric Gel, and Calcium Hydroxide on Pulpotomized Primary Molars: A Preliminary Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2017;10(1):18-23.

Keywords: Formocresol; Propolis; Pulpotomy..

Conflict of interest statement

Source of support: Nil Conflict of interest: None

Figures

Fig. 1:
Fig. 1:
Case selection for pulpotomy: Clinical criteria
Fig. 2:
Fig. 2:
Case selection for pulpotomy: Radiographic criteria
Fig. 3:
Fig. 3:
Technique for pulpotomy
Fig. 4:
Fig. 4:
Completed pulpectomy procedure
Fig. 5:
Fig. 5:
Radiographic failure in the form of internal resorption seen with turmeric pulpotomy
Fig. 6:
Fig. 6:
Radiographic failure in the form of internal resorption seen with calcium hydroxide pulpotomy
Graph 1:
Graph 1:
Success percentage assessed by radiographic findings
Graph 2:
Graph 2:
Success percentage assessed by clinical signs and symptoms

References

    1. Fuks AB. Vital pulp therapy with new materials for primary teeth: new directions and treatment perspectives. Pediatr Dent. 2008 May-Jun;30(3):211–219.
    1. Ranly DM. Pulpotomy therapy in primary teeth: new modalities for old rationales. Pediatr Dent. 1994;16(6):403–409.
    1. Zurn D, Seale NS. Light-cured calcium hydroxide vs formocresol in human primary molar pulpotomies: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Dent. 2008 Jan-Feb;30(1):34–41.
    1. Srinivasan V, Patchett CL, Waterhouse PJ. Is there a life after Buckley’s formocresol? Part I- A narrative review of alternative interventions and materials. Intern J Pediatr Dent. 2006 Mar;16(2):117–127.
    1. Parolia A, Kundabala M, Rao NN, Acharya SR, Agarwal p, Mohan M, Thomas M. A comparative histological analysis of human pulp following direct pulp capping with Propolis, mineral trioxide aggregate and Dycal. Aust Dent J. 2010 Mar;55(1):59–64.
    1. Lawande S. A, Therapeutic applications of turmeric (Curcuma longa) in dentistry: a promising future. J Pharm Biomed Sci. 2013;27(27):586–591.
    1. Waterhouse PJ, Nunn JH, Whitworth JM. An investigation of the relative efficacy of Buckley’s formocresol and calcium hydroxide in primary molar vital pulp therapy. Br Dent J. 2000 Jan;188(1):32–36.
    1. Lewis B. The obsolescence of formocresol. Br Dent J. 2009 Dec;207(11):525–528.
    1. Kahl J, Easton J, Johnson G, Zuk J, Wilson S, Galinkin J. Formocresol blood levels in children receiving dental treatment under general anesthesia. Pediatr Dent. 2008 Sep;30(5):393–399.
    1. Markovic D, Zibojinovic V, Bucetic M. Evaluation of three pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2005;6:133–138.
    1. Huth KC, Paschos E, Hajek-Al-Khatar N et al. Effectiveness of 4 pulpotomy techniques: Randomized controlled trial. J Dent Res. 2005;84:1144–1148.
    1. Heilig J, Yates J, Siskin M, McKnight J, Turner J. Calcium hydroxide pulpotomy for primary teeth: A clinical study. J Am Dent Assoc. 1984;108:775–778.
    1. Kuropatnicki AK, Szliszka E, Krol W. Historical Aspects of Propolis Research in Modern Times. Evid-Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013;2013:964149.
    1. Lima RV, Esmeraldo MR, de Carvalho MG, de Oliviera PT, de Carvalho RA, da Silva FL, de Brito Costa EM. Pulp repair after pulpotomy using different pulp capping agents: a comparative histologic analysis. Pediatr Dent. 2011 Jan-Feb;33(1):14–18.
    1. Julie S, Jurenka MT. Anti-inflammatory properties of curcumin, a major constituent. Alternative Med Rev. 2009;14(2):141–153.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi