Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI – 0.5
Average rejection rate (2021) – 81.35%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download PDF

Dental and Medical Problems

2010, vol. 47, nr 2, April-June, p. 230–235

Publication type: review article

Language: Polish

Obecne poglądy dotyczące leczenia amputacyjnego chorób miazgi zębów mlecznych

Current View on Pulpotomy in Primary Teeth Pulp Diseases Treatment

Katarzyna Herman1,, Justyna Składnik-Jankowska1,, Katarzyna Fita1,

1 Katedra i Zakład Stomatologii Zachowawczej i D ziecięcej Akademii Medycznej we Wrocławiu

Streszczenie

Na podstawie piśmiennictwa przedstawiono standardy postępowania, wskazania i przeciwwskazania do zabiegu pulpotomii zębów mlecznych. Opisano różne metody zaopatrzenia miazgi kanałowej i zanalizowano wyniki leczenia. Omówiono także kryteria oceny skuteczności klinicznej i radiologicznej wykonanych zabiegów. Obecnie w metodzie amputacji istnieje wiele środków do zaopatrzenia miazgi zębów mlecznych mogących być alternatywą dla formokrezolu. Skuteczność siarczanu żelaza, aldehydu glutarowego, MTA, amputacji elektrokoagulacyjnej czy laserowej była zbliżona do formokrezolu. Najmniej satysfakcjonujące wyniki uzyskiwano po stosowaniu wodorotlenku wapnia. Należy jednak podkreślić, że sukces leczenia zależy w dużej mierze od trafnej diagnozy stanu miazgi, gdyż wyżej wymienione metody są przeznaczone prawie wyłącznie do leczenia biologicznego.

Abstract

The authors present the current approach, indications for and contraindications against primary tooth pulpotomy. They provide descriptions of various methods of pulpotomy and analyze their effects. Criteria of clinical and radiological effectiveness are taken into account. The review of publications shows that there is a number of methods which can be an alternative to formocresol use. The effectiveness of ferric sulfate, glutaraldehyde, MTA, electrosurgical and laser pulpotomy is similar to that of formocresol. The worst effectiveness is achieved with calcium hydroxide. It should be noted that treatment success is to a large extent dependent on the accurate diagnosis of the state of pulpa as the above mentioned methods are almost exclusively intended for biological treatment.

Słowa kluczowe

zęby mleczne, leczenie endodontyczne, pulpotomia

Key words

primary teeth, endodontic treatment, pulpotomy

References (31)

  1. Barańska-Gachowska M.: Endodoncja wieku rozwojowego i dojrzałego. Czelej, Lublin 2004.
  2. Sonmez D., Sari S., Cetinbaş T.: A comparison of four pulpotomy techniques in primary molars: a long-term follow-up. J. Endod. 2008, 34, 950–955.
  3. Shayegan A., Petein M., Abbeele A.: Beta Tricalcium phosphate, white mineral trioxide aggregate, white Portland cement, ferric sulfate and formocresol used as pulpotomy agents in primary pig teeth. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod. 2008, 105, 4, 536–542.
  4. Eidelman E., Holan G., Fuks A.: Mineral trioxide aggregate vs. formocresol in pulpotomized primary molars: a preliminary report. Pediatr. Dent. 2001, 23, 1, 15–19.
  5. Noorollahian H.: Comparison of mineral trioxide aggregate and formocresol as pulp medicaments for pulpotomies in primary molars. Br. Dent. J. 2008, 204, 11, 20–24.
  6. Huth K.C., Paschos E., Hajek-Al-Khatar N., Hollweck R., Crispin A., Hickel R., Folwaczny M.: Effectiveness of 4 pulpotomy techniques-randomized controlled trial. J. Dent. Res. 2005, 84, 12, 1144–1148.
  7. Zarzar P.A., Rosenblatt A.,Takahashi C.S., Takeuchi P.L., Costa Jũnior L.A.: Formocresol mutagenicity following primary tooth pulp therapy: an in vivo study. J. Dent. 2003, 31, 7, 479–485.
  8. Tsai T.P., Su H.L., Tseng L.H.: Glutaraldehyde preparations and pulpotomy in primary molars. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. 1993, 76, 3, 346–350.
  9. Araujo F.B., Ely L.B., Pergo A.M., Pesce H.F.: A clinical evaluation of 2% buffered glutaraldehyde in pulpotomies of human diciduous teeth: a 24-month study. Braz. Dent. J. 1995, 6, 1, 41–44.
  10. Prakash C., Chandra S., Jaiswal J.N.: Formocresol and glutaraldehyde pulpotomies in primary teeth. J. Pedod. 1989, 13, 4, 314–322.
  11. Moretti A.B., Sakai V.T., Oliveira T.M., Fornetti A.P., Santos C.F., Machado M.A., Abdo R.C.: The effectiveness of mineral trioxide aggregate, calcium hydroxide and formocresol for pulpotomies in primary teeth. Int. Endod. J. 2008, 41, 7, 457–455.
  12. Markovic D., Zibojinovic V., Bucetic M.: Evaluation of three pulpotomy medicaments in primary teeth. Eur. J. Paediatr. Dent. 2005, 6, 133–138.
  13. Waterhouse P.J., Nunn J.H., Whitworth J.N.: An investigation of the relative efficacy of Buckley’s formocresol and calcium hydroxide in primary molars vital pulp therapy. Br. Dent. J. 2000, 188, 32–36.
  14. Salako N., Joseph B., Ritwik P.,Salonen J., John P., Junaid T.A.: Comparison of bioactive glass, mineral trioxide aggregate, ferric sulfate and formocresol as pulpotomy agents in rat molar. Dent. Traumatol. 2003, 19, 314–320.
  15. De Mezenez J.V., Takamori E.R., Bijella M.F., Granjeiro J.M.: In vitro toxicity of MTa compared with other primary teeth pulpotomy agents. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent. 2009, 33, 3, 217–221.
  16. Aeinecchi M., Dadvand S., Fayazi S., Bayad-Movahed S.: Randomized controlled trial of mineral trioxide aggregate and formocresol for pulpotomy in primary molar teeth. Int. Endod. J. 2007, 40, 4, 261–267.
  17. P eng L., Ye L., Tan H., Zhou X.: Evaluation of formocresol versus mineral trioxide aggregate primary molar pulpotomy: a meta-analysis. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod. 2006, 102, 6, 40–44.
  18. Farsi N., Alamoudi N., Balto K., Mushayt A.: Success of mineral trioxide aggregate in pulpotomized primary molars. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent. 2005, 29, 4, 307–311.
  19. Fuks A., Holan G., Davis J.M., Eidelman E.: Ferric sulfate versus dilute formocresol in pulpotomized primary molars: long-term follow up. Pediatr. Dent. 1997, 19, 5, 327–330.
  20. Bahrololoomi Z., Moeintaghavi A., Emtiazi M., Hosseini G.: Clinical and radiographic comparison of primary molars after formocresol and electrosurgical pulpotomy: a randomized clinical trial. Indian J. Dent. Res. 2008, 19, 3, 219–223.
  21. Dean J.A., Mack R.B., Fulkerson B.T., Sanders B.J.: Comparison of electrosurgical and formocresol pulpotomy in children. Int. J. Paediatr. Dent. 2002, 12, 3, 177–182.
  22. Toomarian L., Fekrazard R., Sharifi D., Baghaei M., Rahimi H., Eslami B.: Histopathological evaluation of pulpotomy with Er, Cr:YSGG laser vs formocresol. Lasers Med. Sci. 2008, 23, 4, 443–445.
  23. Wilkerson M.K., Hill S.D., Arcoria C.J.: Effects of the argon laser on primary tooth pulpotomies in swine. J. C lin. Laser Med. Surg. 1996, 14, 1, 37–42.
  24. Jukić S., Anić I., Koba K., Najzar-Flegel D., Matsumoto K.: The effect of pulpoptomy using CO2 and Nd:YAG lasers on dental pulp tissue. Int. Endod. J. 1997, 30, 3, 175–180.
  25. Odabaş M.E., Bodur H., Bariş E., Demir C.: Clinical, radiographic and histopathologic evaluation of Nd:YAG laser pulpotomy on human primary teeth. J. E ndod. 2007, 33, 4, 415–421.
  26. Liu J.F.: Effects of Nd:YAG laser pulpotomy on human primary molars. J. Endod. 2006, 32, 5, 404–407.
  27. Nakashima M.: Induction of dentine formation on canine amputated pulp by recombinant human bone morphogenetic proteins (BMP)-2 and 4. J. Dent. Res. 1994, 73, 1515–1522.
  28. Rutherford R.B., Wahle J.,Tucker M., Roger D., Charette M.: Induction of reparative dentine formation in monkeys by recombinant human osteogenic protein-1. Arch. Oral. Biol. 1993, 38, 571–576.
  29. Sabbarini J., Mohamed A., Wahba N., El-Meligy O., Dean J.: Comparison of enamel matrix derivative versus formocresol as pulpotomy agents in the primary dentition. J. Endod. 2008, 34, 3, 284–287.
  30. Vargas K.G., Packham B.: Radiographic success of ferric sulfate and formocresol pulpotomies in relation to early exfoliation. Pediatr. Dent. 2005, 27, 3, 233–237.
  31. Jurczak A., Kwapińska H., Kołodziej I.: Zastosowanie siarczanu żelaza w leczeniu amputacyjnym stanów zapalnych miazgi zębów mlecznych. Poradnik Stomatol. 2006, 6, 11–12, 39–43.