6. Summary of Findings Table (): A.Baseline and demographic data: Study Design No of patients No of teeth pulpotomy No of teeth pulpectomy Age Nguyen, Judd et al.2017 Randomized controlled trial 70 100 72 18-46m Canada. Howley, Seale et al. 2012 Randomized controlled trial 29 Start with 50 End with 37 Start with 50 End with 37 18-60 m Mean m United states of america Aminabadi, Farahani et al. 2008 Randomized controlled trial 50 45 46 3-4 y Iran Casas, Kenny et al. 2004 Clinical trial 50 Start with:64 End with:41 Start with:29 End with:36 3.3±0.8 y 3.1±0.7 y Canada B.Methodological steps: Conducted by Anesthesia Materials Radiograph Final restoration Follow up
Nguyen, Judd et al.2017 Five pediatric dentists completed all pulp therapy. Another Two experienced pediatric dentist performed radiographic evaluation. a single investigator bperformed all clinical assessments. General anesthesia Pulpotomy:ferric sulfate then mineral trioxide aggregate as a capping material. Pulpectomy: nonreinforced ZOE acid etch resin At 12 and 18 months Howley, et al. 2012 Two standardized operators completed all treatments and two standardized and calibrated examiners evaluated radiographs General anesthesia Pulpotomy:full strength Buckely formcresol and zinc oxide and eugenol as capping material Pulpectomy: vitapex(calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste) Standardized maxillary occlusal radiograph Stainless steel crown(SCC) or SCC with white esthetic veneer 23m Mean (13.0±5.6m) 10-14, and 15-23 m Aminabadi, Farahani et al. 2008 One pediatric dentist completed Local anesthesia Pulpotomy:formcresol(buckley 1.5%), fortified zinc oxide and eugenol as capping material Size 0 periapical films using bisecting Self- cure resin restoration 24 m Intervals:12 and 24m
all treatments and two clinicians analyzed clinical and radiographic outcomes Pulpectomy: zinc oxide and eugenol angle technique Casas, Kenny et al. 2004 Three pediatric dentists completed the treatment and two independent pediatric dentists evaluated the radiographs General anesthesia Pulpotomy:ferric sulphate and zinc oxide and eugenol as capping material Pulpectomy:zinc oxide and eugenol Size 0 periapical films using bisecting angle technique Acid-etch resin restoration 2y Intervals:12 and 24m
C.Outcome and results: Outcome Results Name Device unit Pulpotomy Pulpectomy P Value Nguyen, Judd et al.2017 Pathologic root resorption Radiograph Binary Internal External External OR equals 136.41; 95 % CI equals 15.02 to 1238.27 Periapical radiolucency OR equals 177.55; 95 % CI equals 20.29 to 1554.01 Pulp obliteration OR equals 5.33; 95% CI equals 1.04 to 27.20 Success rate Radiographical Clinical At 12m97% At 18m 93% At 18m97% At 12m and 18m 92% At 12m 100%,18m 99% Howley, Seale et al. 2012 Pathologic root resorption Radiograph Binary Internal 7% External 3% External 10% Periapical radiolucency Radiograph Binary 3% 17% Pulp canal obliteration Radiograph Binary 60% Success rate Radiographical 89% 73% P value: 0.11 Aminabadi, Farahani et al. 2008 Pathologic root resorption Radiograph Binary 13.3% 4.34% Periapical radiolucency Radiograph Binary 11.11% 2.17% Pain Questionnaire Binary 4.4% 2.2% Fistulous tract Visual exam. Binary 6.6%
Success rate Clinical &radiographical 86.9%clinical 76.08% radiographical 95.6%clinical 91.3% radiographical P value: ˃0.05 clinical ˂0.05 radiographic Outcome Results ‘ Name Device unit Pulpotomy Pulpectomy P Value Casas, Kenny et al. 2004 Pathologic root resorption Radiograph Binary Internal 17% External 33% External 27% Periapical radiolucency Radiograph Binary 58% 27% Pulp canal obliteration Radiograph Binary 25% Widening of PDL space Radiograph Binary 67% 18% Pain Questionnaire Binary 0% 0% Gingival swelling Visual exam. Binary 22% Fistulous tract Visual exam. Binary 22% Success rate Clinical and radiographical 78%clinical 59%radiographical 100%clinical 82%radiographical P value: ˃0.05 radiographical