BACKGROUND: Formocresol remains to be the preferred medicament in pulpotomy, despite the concerns regarding tissue devitalization and systemic toxicity. Several materials were used as alternatives, but none proved significantly advantageous. Of recent, calcium phosphate cement (CPC) has been projected as an ideal pulpotomy material considering its tissue compatibility and dentinogenic properties. This study explores the suitability of a CPC formulation for pulpotomy, in comparison with formocresol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This comparative case study included 10 children (8-12 age group) having a pair of non-carious primary canines (both maxillary and mandibular) posted for extraction. Pulpotomy was performed with CPC in the right canines and formocresol in the left and sealed with IRM ® (Dentsply). The teeth were extracted at 70 ± 5 days and sectioned and stained for the histopathological evaluation. Parameters such as pulpal inflammation, tissue reaction to material, dentine bridge formation, location of dentine bridge, quality of dentine formation in bridge, and connective tissue in bridge etc. were evaluated. RESULTS: The histological assessment after 70 days showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in any of the parameters. However, CPC gave more favorable results in pulpal inflammation, with a lower score of 1.6 against 2.6 for formocresol. CPC samples showed better formation of dentine bridge in quantity and quality. The mean scores for CPC for the extent of dentine bridge formation, quality of dentine bridge and connective tissue in the bridge, were 2.0, 1.4, and 1.2 respectively, whereas the corresponding values for formocresol were 0.8, 0.2, and 1.0. CONCLUSION: CPC is more compatible to pulp tissues than formocresol and it shows good healing potential. CPC is capable of inducing dentine formation without an area of necrosis.
BACKGROUND:Formocresol remains to be the preferred medicament in pulpotomy, despite the concerns regarding tissue devitalization and systemic toxicity. Several materials were used as alternatives, but none proved significantly advantageous. Of recent, calcium phosphate cement (CPC) has been projected as an ideal pulpotomy material considering its tissue compatibility and dentinogenic properties. This study explores the suitability of a CPC formulation for pulpotomy, in comparison with formocresol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This comparative case study included 10 children (8-12 age group) having a pair of non-carious primary canines (both maxillary and mandibular) posted for extraction. Pulpotomy was performed with CPC in the right canines and formocresol in the left and sealed with IRM ® (Dentsply). The teeth were extracted at 70 ± 5 days and sectioned and stained for the histopathological evaluation. Parameters such as pulpal inflammation, tissue reaction to material, dentine bridge formation, location of dentine bridge, quality of dentine formation in bridge, and connective tissue in bridge etc. were evaluated. RESULTS: The histological assessment after 70 days showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in any of the parameters. However, CPC gave more favorable results in pulpal inflammation, with a lower score of 1.6 against 2.6 for formocresol. CPC samples showed better formation of dentine bridge in quantity and quality. The mean scores for CPC for the extent of dentine bridge formation, quality of dentine bridge and connective tissue in the bridge, were 2.0, 1.4, and 1.2 respectively, whereas the corresponding values for formocresol were 0.8, 0.2, and 1.0. CONCLUSION:CPC is more compatible to pulp tissues than formocresol and it shows good healing potential. CPC is capable of inducing dentine formation without an area of necrosis.