Comparative evaluation of three different materials: mineral trioxide aggregate, triple antibiotic paste, and abscess remedy on apical development of vital young permanent teeth

Abstract

Aims:The aim of the study is to compare the success rate of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), Triple antibiotic paste, and Abscess remedy in apical development of vital young permanent teeth.Subjects and Methods:A total of 60 children aged 6–14 years were selected and were randomly divided into three groups, each comprising of 20 children. Group I, Group II, and Group III in which MTA (Pro root), triple antibiotic paste (3Mix MP), and Abscess remedy (Product Dentaire, Switzerland) was used pulpotomy medicament. The children were recalled 1, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months for clinical and radiographic evaluation and were designed as single-blinded randomized clinical trial.Statistical Analysis Used:Chi-square test.Results:The follow-up evaluations revealed that 56 teeth appeared to be clinically and radiographically successful at 24 months’ postoperative evaluation. Four teeth treated with Abscess remedy reported pain and periapical lesion.Conclusions:Overall success rate for all the material was 93%, MTA and Triple antibiotic paste have shown 100% success rate, and Abscess remedy has shown 80% success rate.

Materials for pulpotomy in immature permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…After screening titles and abstracts, a full-text assessment of 12 articles was conducted by 2 independent investigators (inter-reviewer agreement, kappa = 0.91). Finally, five studies [15–19] were finally selected, two of which were chosen for meta-analysis at 6 and 12-month periods respectively [17, 18]. The study selection process is presented as a flow chart in Fig.…”

“…The five included studies were published between 2006 and 2018, two of which were conducted in India [16, 19], one in Iran [15], one in Turkey [18] and one in Egypt [17]. Of the five studies, four were parallel trials and the remaining study was a split-mouth trial.…”

“…Of the five studies, four were parallel trials and the remaining study was a split-mouth trial. Of the included studies, two compared MTA with CH [17, 18], one compared CEM with MTA [15], one compared PRF with MTA [16], and one compared MTA, TAP and abscess remedy [19]. Four studies with 232 teeth used each tooth as a unit of analysis [16–19], while the other one with 118 roots used each root as a unit [15].…”

“…Of the included studies, two compared MTA with CH [17, 18], one compared CEM with MTA [15], one compared PRF with MTA [16], and one compared MTA, TAP and abscess remedy [19]. Four studies with 232 teeth used each tooth as a unit of analysis [16–19], while the other one with 118 roots used each root as a unit [15]. Only one study [17] included traumatized teeth and carious teeth, all of the other four studies only included carious teeth [15, 16, 18, 19].…”

“…Four studies with 232 teeth used each tooth as a unit of analysis [16–19], while the other one with 118 roots used each root as a unit [15]. Only one study [17] included traumatized teeth and carious teeth, all of the other four studies only included carious teeth [15, 16, 18, 19]. The sample sizes varied from 30 to 80 teeth.…”