Clinical and histological response of human pulp tissue to direct pulp capping with mineral trioxide aggregate, Biodentine and propolis.
Biodentine
direct pulp capping
mineral trioxide aggregate
propolis
Journal
Dental research journal
ISSN: 1735-3327
Titre abrégé: Dent Res J (Isfahan)
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101471186
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
28
01
2020
revised:
02
07
2020
accepted:
09
11
2021
entrez:
7
6
2022
pubmed:
8
6
2022
medline:
8
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study clinically and histologically compared the human pulp response to direct pulp capping (DPC) with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), Biodentine, and propolis in 2 months. In this clinical trial evaluated 41 premolars candidate for extraction due to orthodontic purposes of patients between 15 and 25 years of age. A group of 5 was separated randomly as the negative control. The remaining teeth were randomly divided into three experimental groups of 12 after mechanical exposure of the pulp by bur in high-speed handpiece under air and water spray. The exposed areas were capped with MTA, Biodentine, or propolis. Glass ionomer was applied as base over the cap. The teeth were restored with composite resin. Patients were recalled in 2 months for clinical and radiographic examinations and also pulp vitality test. Teeth were then extracted. Slides were prepared and tissue sections were evaluated for the presence and severity of inflammation, dentinal bridge, and continuity. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. The clinical success rate was 100% in the MTA and 91.7% in both the propolis and Biodentine groups. The presence and severity of pulpal inflammation and dentinal bridge formation were similar in all the experimental groups ( MTA, Biodentine, and propolis are equally effective for DPC.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
This study clinically and histologically compared the human pulp response to direct pulp capping (DPC) with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), Biodentine, and propolis in 2 months.
Materials and Methods
UNASSIGNED
In this clinical trial evaluated 41 premolars candidate for extraction due to orthodontic purposes of patients between 15 and 25 years of age. A group of 5 was separated randomly as the negative control. The remaining teeth were randomly divided into three experimental groups of 12 after mechanical exposure of the pulp by bur in high-speed handpiece under air and water spray. The exposed areas were capped with MTA, Biodentine, or propolis. Glass ionomer was applied as base over the cap. The teeth were restored with composite resin. Patients were recalled in 2 months for clinical and radiographic examinations and also pulp vitality test. Teeth were then extracted. Slides were prepared and tissue sections were evaluated for the presence and severity of inflammation, dentinal bridge, and continuity. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The clinical success rate was 100% in the MTA and 91.7% in both the propolis and Biodentine groups. The presence and severity of pulpal inflammation and dentinal bridge formation were similar in all the experimental groups (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
MTA, Biodentine, and propolis are equally effective for DPC.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
40Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2022 Dental Research Journal.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors of this manuscript declare that they have no conflicts of interest, real or perceived, financial or non-financial in this article.
Références
J Endod. 2006 Mar;32(3):193-7
pubmed: 16500224
J Conserv Dent. 2017 Mar-Apr;20(2):129-133
pubmed: 28855762
J Conserv Dent. 2011 Oct;14(4):351-5
pubmed: 22144801
Int Endod J. 2006 Jun;39(6):429-42
pubmed: 16674738
J Endod. 2010 Nov;36(11):1778-81
pubmed: 20951286
Head Face Med. 2015 May 02;11:16
pubmed: 25934270
J Endod. 2010 Jan;36(1):16-27
pubmed: 20003930
Restor Dent Endod. 2015 Nov;40(4):276-85
pubmed: 26587413
J Ethnopharmacol. 2000 Nov;73(1-2):243-9
pubmed: 11025162
J Endod. 2017 Apr;43(4):507-513
pubmed: 28216271
Oper Dent. 2005 Mar-Apr;30(2):147-55
pubmed: 15853098
Iran Endod J. 2015 Summer;10(3):188-92
pubmed: 26213542
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Jan;17(1):243-9
pubmed: 22411260
Dent Mater. 2010 Dec;26(12):1127-32
pubmed: 20728209
J Endod. 2013 Mar;39(3):327-31
pubmed: 23402502
J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2013 Jun;24(6):1527-34
pubmed: 23515903
Dent Mater. 2005 Aug;21(8):731-8
pubmed: 15935463
Int J Dent. 2009;2009:464280
pubmed: 20339574
Aust Dent J. 2010 Mar;55(1):59-64
pubmed: 20415913
Int Endod J. 2012 May;45(5):439-48
pubmed: 22188368
J Endod. 2011 Jun;37(6):786-8
pubmed: 21787489
J Endod. 2018 Nov;44(11):1603-1609
pubmed: 30292451
J Dent (Shiraz). 2020 Sep;21(3):177-183
pubmed: 33062810
Dent Traumatol. 2008 Apr;24(2):201-6
pubmed: 18352925
Gen Dent. 2010 May-Jun;58(3):194-200; quiz 201-2
pubmed: 20478799
Braz Oral Res. 2011 Jan-Feb;25(1):13-8
pubmed: 21359446
J Dent. 2000 Feb;28(2):77-92
pubmed: 10666965
J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Mar;139(3):305-15; quiz 305-15
pubmed: 18310735
J Endod. 2010 May;36(5):814-9
pubmed: 20416425
J Endod. 2013 Jun;39(6):743-7
pubmed: 23683272