| Literature DB >> 27957486 |
Volkan Arikan1, Hayriye Sonmez2, Saziye Sari2.
Abstract
Introduction. The aim of this study was to compare MTA with another base material, IRM, which is generally used on pulpal floor after root canal treatment, regarding their effect on the success of root canal treatment of primary teeth with furcation lesions. Materials and Methods. Fifty primary teeth with furcation lesions were divided into 2 groups. Following root canal treatment, the pulpal floor was coated with MTA in the experimental group and with IRM in the control group. Teeth were followed up considering clinical (pain, pathological mobility, tenderness to percussion and palpation, and any soft tissue pathology and sinus tract) and radiographical (pathological root resorption, reduced size or healing of existing lesion, and absence of new lesions at the interradicular or periapical area) criteria for 18 months. For the statistical analysis, Fisher's exact test and Pearson's chi-square tests were used and a p value of <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results. Although there were no statistically significant differences between two groups in terms of treatment success, lesions healed significantly faster in the MTA group. Conclusion. In primary teeth with furcation lesions, usage of MTA on the pulpal floor following root canal treatment can be a better alternative since it induced faster healing.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27957486 PMCID: PMC5121461 DOI: 10.1155/2016/1429286
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Comparison of different filling extents in terms of success in two groups.
| Success | Fail |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Flush-filled | 11 (68.8%) | 4 (44.4%) | 0.397 |
| Overfilled | 5 (31.2%) | 5 (55.6%) | |
|
| |||
| Flush-filled | 13 (68.4%) | 2 (33.3%) | 0.175 |
| Overfilled | 6 (31.6%) | 4 (66.7%) |
Figure 1Flowchart showing successes and failures throughout the study.
Figure 2(a) Radiograph of second primary mandibular molar with a lesion in the interradicular area in IRM group. (b) Radiograph of the tooth after treatment. (c) Radiograph of the tooth at the 3rd month visit. (d) Radiograph of the tooth at the 12th month visit. (e) Radiograph of the tooth at the 18th month visit.
Figure 3(a) Radiograph of second primary mandibular molar with a lesion in the interradicular area in MTA group. (b) Radiograph of the tooth after treatment. (c) Radiograph of the tooth at the 3rd month visit. (d) Radiograph of the tooth at the 12th month visit. (e) Radiograph of the tooth at the 18th month visit.
Comparison of two groups regarding treatment success during follow-up period.
| Controls | IRM group | MTA group |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st month | 25/25 (100%) | 25/25 (100%) | — |
| 3rd month | 25/25 (100%) | 25/25 (100%) | — |
| 6th month | 23/25 (92%) | 25/25 (100%) | 0.490 |
| 12th month | 21/25 (84%) | 23/25 (92%) | 0.667 |
| 18th month | 16/25 (64%) | 19/25 (76%) | 0.355 |
Comparison of two groups in terms of lesion healing times in successful cases.
| Successful cases | Total healing at the 3rd month | Total healing at the 6th month |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| IRM Group | 11 | 5 | 0,013 |
| MTA Group | 19 | 0 |