Top

Clinical Oral Investigations

Published in:

01-04-2021 | Caries | Original Article

Prognostic factors for the survival of primary molars following pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate: a retrospective cohort study

Authors: Chi Hoon Kim, Jee Soo Bae, Ik-Hwan Kim, Je Seon Song, Hyung-Jun Choi, Chung-Min Kang

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 4/2021

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to evaluate potential factors influencing the success rates of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) pulpotomy performed in primary molars.

Materials and methods

A total of 347 teeth treated between March 2012 and December 2016 in 258 patients, with a mean age of 5.3 ± 1.7 years, were included in the analysis. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to analyze were used time to failure. Multivariate Cox regression analysis with shared frailty was used to evaluate the clinical factors associated with failures.

Results

The mean (standard deviation) follow-up period was 35.8 (19.6) months. Within 84 months, the survival rate was 87.1%. In multivariate Cox regression, treatment performed in lower primary molars had a lower survival rate than upper primary molars (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.38, P = 0.012). Caries extension below the cemento-enamel junction had more risk of failure (HR = 10.9, P < 0.001). Final restoration using resin-modified glass ionomer or amalgam (direct filling) had a lower survival rate than stainless steel crown (HR = 5.62, P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Clinical variables such as arch type, degree of caries extension, and type of final restoration may affect the survival of primary molars following MTA pulpotomy.

Clinical relevance

The results of this study indicate that specific clinical variables can be used to predict the prognosis of MTA pulpotomy in primary teeth, and estimate the risk of treatment failure. Assessments of these variables should be performed in the context of evidence-based clinical decision making.

Fuks AB, Kupietzky A, Guelmann M (2019) Pulp therapy for the primary dentition. In: Nowak AJ, Christensen JR, Mabry TR, Townsend JA, Wells MH (eds) Pediatric dentistry: infancy through adolescence, 6th edn. Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-60826-8.00023-7CrossRef

Fuks AB (2002) Current concepts in vital primary pulp therapy. Eur J Paediatr Dent 3(3):115–120PubMed

Tziafas D (2004) The future role of a molecular approach to pulp-dentinal regeneration. Caries Res 38(3):314–320. https://doi.org/10.1159/000077771CrossRefPubMed

Smail-Faugeron V, Glenny AM, Courson F, Durieux P, Muller-Bolla M, Fron Chabouis H (2018) Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5(5):CD003220. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003220.pub3CrossRefPubMed

Sun HW, Feigal RJ, Messer HH (1990) Cytotoxicity of glutaraldehyde and formaldehyde in relation to time of exposure and concentration. Pediatr Dent 12(5):303–307PubMed

Srinivasan V, Patchett CL, Waterhouse PJ (2006) Is there life after Buckley’s Formocresol? Part I--a narrative review of alternative interventions and materials. Int J Paediatr Dent 16(2):117–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2006.00688.xCrossRefPubMed

Fuks AB (2008) Vital pulp therapy with new materials for primary teeth: new directions and treatment perspectives. J Endod 34(7):18–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.02.031CrossRef

Schröder U (1978) A 2-year follow-up of primary molars, pulpotomized with a gentle technique and capped with calcium hydroxide. Scand J Dent Res 86(4):273–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1978.tb00628.xCrossRefPubMed

Waterhouse PJ (1995) Formocresol and alternative primary molar pulpotomy medicaments: a review. Endod Dent Traumatol 11(4):157–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1995.tb00479.xCrossRefPubMed

10.

Waterhouse PJ, Nunn JH, Whitworth JM (2000) An investigation of the relative efficacy of Buckley’s formocresol and calcium hydroxide in primary molar vital pulp therapy. Br Dent J 188(1):32–36. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800380CrossRefPubMed

11.

Mitchell PJ, Pitt Ford TR, Torabinejad M, McDonald F (1999) Osteoblast biocompatibility of mineral trioxide aggregate. Biomaterials 20(2):167–173CrossRef

12.

Kang JY, Kim JS, Yoo SH (2011) Comparison of setting expansion and time of orthoMTA, proroot MTA and Portland cement (comparison of setting expansion and time of orthomta, proroot mta and Portland cement). J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent 38(3):229–236

13.

Ferreira DC, Brito DG, Cavalcanti BN (2009) Cytokine production from human primary teeth pulp fibroblasts stimulated by different pulpotomy agents. J Dent Child (Chic) 76(3):194–198

14.

Torabinejad M, Chivian N (1999) Clinical applications of mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod 25(3):197–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(99)80142-3CrossRefPubMed

15.

Agamy HA, Bakry NS, Mounir MMF, Avery DR (2004) Comparison of mineral trioxide aggregate and formocresol as pulp-capping agents in pulpotomized primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 26(4):302–309PubMed

16.

Ng FK, Messer LB (2008) Mineral trioxide aggregate as a pulpotomy medicament: a narrative review. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 9(1):4–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03321589CrossRefPubMed

17.

Cardoso-Silva C, Barberia E, Maroto M, Garcia-Godoy F (2011) Clinical study of mineral trioxide aggregate in primary molars. comparison between grey and white MTA--a long term follow-up (84 months). J Dent 39(2):187–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.11.010CrossRefPubMed

18.

Holan G, Eidelman E, Fuks AB (2005) Long-term evaluation of pulpotomy in primary molars using mineral trioxide aggregate or formocresol. Pediatr Dent 27(2):129–136PubMed

19.

Liu H, Zhou Q, Qin M (2011) Mineral trioxide aggregate versus calcium hydroxide for pulpotomy in primary molars. Chin J Dent Res 14(2):121–125PubMed

20.

Celik B, Atac AS, Cehreli ZC, Uysal S (2013) A randomized trial of mineral trioxide aggregate cements in primary tooth pulpotomies. J Dent Child (Chic) 80(3):126–132

21.

Yildiz E, Tosun G (2014) Evaluation of formocresol, calcium hydroxide, ferric sulfate, and MTA primary molar pulpotomies. Eur J Dent 8(2):234–240. https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.130616CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Musale PK, Soni AS (2016) Clinical Pulpotomy trial of Copaifera langsdorffii oil resin versus formocresol and white mineral trioxide aggregate in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 38(2):5–12PubMed

23.

Kang CM, Kim SH, Shin Y, Lee HS, Lee JH, Kim GT, Song JS (2015) A randomized controlled trial of ProRoot MTA, OrthoMTA and RetroMTA for pulpotomy in primary molars. Oral Dis 21(6):785–791. https://doi.org/10.1111/odi.12348CrossRefPubMed

24.

Shirvani A, Asgary S (2014) Mineral trioxide aggregate versus formocresol pulpotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Clin Oral Investig 18(4):1023–1030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1189-2CrossRefPubMed

25.

Farsi N, Alamoudi N, Balto K, Mushayt A (2005) Success of mineral trioxide aggregate in pulpotomized primary molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 29(4):307–311. https://doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.29.4.n80t77w625118k73CrossRefPubMed

26.

Stringhini Junior E, Vitcel ME, Oliveira LB (2015) Evidence of pulpotomy in primary teeth comparing MTA, calcium hydroxide, ferric sulphate, and electrosurgery with formocresol. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 16(4):303–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-015-0174-zCrossRefPubMed

27.

Dhar V, Marghalani AA, Crystal YO, Kumar A, Ritwik P, Tulunoglu O, Graham L (2017) Use of vital pulp therapies in primary teeth with deep caries lesions. Pediatr Dent 39(5):146–159PubMed

28.

Anthonappa RP, King NM, Martens LC (2013) Is there sufficient evidence to support the long-term efficacy of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) for endodontic therapy in primary teeth? Int Endod J 46(3):198–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02128.xCrossRefPubMed

29.

Lin PY, Chen HS, Wang YH, Tu YK (2014) Primary molar pulpotomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Dent 42(9):1060–1077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.001CrossRefPubMed

30.

(2018) Pulp therapy for primary and immature permanent teeth. Pediatr Dent 40(6):343–351

31.

Pedrotti D, Ribeiro JF, Weber Pires C, de Oliveira RR, Ardenghi TM, Soares FZM, Lenzi TL (2017) Survival and associated risk factors of resin-based composite restorations in primary teeth: a clinical, retrospective, university-based study. Pediatr Dent 39(4):313–318PubMed

32.

Campagna P, Pinto LT, Lenzi TL, Ardenghi TM, de Oliveira RR, Oliveira MDM (2018) Survival and associated risk factors of composite restorations in children with early childhood caries: a clinical retrospective study. Pediatr Dent 40(3):210–214PubMed

33.

Strange DM, Seale NS, Nunn ME, Strange M (2001) Outcome of formocresol/ZOE sub-base pulpotomies utilizing alternative radiographic success criteria. Pediatr Dent 23(4):331–336PubMed

34.

Ward J (2002) Vital pulp therapy in cariously exposed permanent teeth and its limitations. Aust Endod J 28(1):29–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2002.tb00364.xCrossRefPubMed

35.

Awawdeh L, Al-Qudah A, Hamouri H, Chakra RJ (2018) Outcomes of vital pulp therapy using mineral trioxide aggregate or biodentine: a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Endod 44(11):1603–1609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.08.004CrossRefPubMed

36.

Olmez A, Tuna D, Ozdogan YT, Ulker AE (2008) The effectiveness of different thickness of mineral trioxide aggregate on coronal leakage in endodontically treated deciduous teeth. J Dent Child (Chic) 75(3):260–263

37.

Gross EL, Nowak AJ (2019) The dynamics of change. In: Nowak AJ, Christensen JR, Mabry TR, Townsend JA, Wells MH (eds) Pediatric dentistry: infancy through adolescence, vol 6th. Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 260–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-60826-8.00018-3CrossRef

38.

Seale NS, Randall R (2015) The use of stainless steel crowns: a systematic literature review. Pediatr Dent 37(2):147–162

39.

Al-Zayer MA, Straffon LH, Feigal RJ, Welch KB (2003) Indirect pulp treatment of primary posterior teeth: a retrospective study. Pediatr Dent 25(1):29–36PubMed

40.

Guelmann M, Fair J, Bimstein E (2005) Permanent versus temporary restorations after emergency pulpotomies in primary molars. Pediatr Dent 27(6):478–481PubMed

41.

Hutcheson C, Seale NS, McWhorter A, Kerins C, Wright J (2012) Multi-surface composite vs stainless steel crown restorations after mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Dent 34(7):460–467PubMed

Title: Prognostic factors for the survival of primary molars following pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate: a retrospective cohort study
Authors: Chi Hoon Kim
Jee Soo Bae
Ik-Hwan Kim
Je Seon Song
Hyung-Jun Choi
Chung-Min Kang
Publication date: 01-04-2021
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keyword: Caries
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 4/2021
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03482-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Prognostic factors for the survival of primary molars following pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate: a retrospective cohort study

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2021

A case-control study of oral diseases and quality of life in individuals with rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus

Effects of air-abrasion pressure on mechanical and bonding properties of translucent zirconia

Establishment and validation of a predictive nomogram for extended operation time following mandibular third molar removal

Combination of etodolac and dexamethasone improves preemptive analgesia in third molar surgery: a randomized study

Biological and technical complications in root cap–retained overdentures after 3–15 years in situ: a retrospective clinical study

Highly variable rate of orthodontic tooth movement measured by a novel 3D method correlates with gingival inflammation