Use of Non-Vital Pulp Therapies in Primary Teeth
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47990/9s3kgy10Keywords:
Pulp therapies, Primary teeth, Guidelines, Non-vital pulpAbstract
Abstract: Purpose: To present an evidence-based guideline for non-vital pulp therapies due to deep caries or trauma in primary teeth. Methods: The authors, working with the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis for studies on non-vital primary teeth resulting from trauma or caries and used the GRADE approach to assess level of certainty of evidence for clinical recommendations. Results: GRADE was assessed from high to very low. Comparing teeth with/without root resorption, pulpectomy success was better (P<0.001) in those without preoperative root resorption. Zinc oxide plus iodoform plus calcium hydroxide ([ZO/iodoform/CH]; EndoflasTM) and zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) pulpectomy success did not differ from iodoform (iodoform plus calcium hydroxide; VitapexTM, MetapexTM) (P=0.55) after 18-months; however, ZO/iodoform/CH and ZOE success rates remained near 90 percent while iodoform was 71 percent or less. Network analysis ratings showed ZO/iodoform/CH and ZOE better than iodoform. Lesion sterilization tissue repair (LSTR) was better (P<0.001) than pulpectomy in teeth with preoperative root resorption, but pulpectomy results were better (P=0.09) if roots were intact. Rotary instrumentation of root canals was significantly faster (P<0.001) than manual, but the quality of fill did not differ (P=0.09) and both had comparable success. Network analysis ranked ZO/iodoform/CH the best, ZOE second, and iodoform lowest at 18 months. Success rates were not impacted by method of obturation or root length determination, type of tooth, number of visits, irrigants, smear layer removal, or timing/type of final restoration. Conclusions: Pulpectomy 18-month success rates supported ZO/iodoform/CH and ZOE pulpectomy over iodoform. LSTR had limited indication for teeth with resorbed roots and requires close monitoring. (Pediatr Dent 2020;42(5):337-49) Received April 16, 2020 | Last Revision June 13, 2020 | Accepted June 15, 2020
References
1. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Pulp therapy for primary and immature permanent teeth.Reference Manual of Pediatric Dentistry. Chicago, IL. Pediatr Dent 2019;41(6):353-361.
2. Coll JA, Vargas K, Marghalani AA, et al. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of non-vital pulp therapy
for Primary Teeth. Pediatr Dent 2020: 15;42(4):256-461.
3. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and
summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:383–94
4. Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A. Recommendations and their strength. Going from evidence
to recommendations. GRADE Handbook. Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength
of recommendations using the GRADE approach. Updat Oct. 2013. from http://gdt.guidelinedevelopment.
org/app/handbook/handbook.html.
5. Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A. Quality of Evidence. GRADE Handbook. Handbook for
grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. Updat
Oct. 2013. http://gdt.guidelinedevelopment.org/app/handbook/handbook.html.
6. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry Introduction. Overview. Reference Manual of Pediatric Dentistry.
Chicago, Ill.: American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry; 2019;41(6):7-9.
7. Mutluay M, Arıkan V, Sarı S, Kısa Ü. Does Achievement of Hemostasis After Pulp Exposure Provide an
Accurate Assessment of Pulp Inflammation? Pediatr Dent 2018;40 (1):37-42
8. Trairatvorakul C, Detsomboonrat P. Success rates of a mixture of ciprofloxacin, metronidazole, and
minocycline antibiotics used in the non-instrumentation endodontic treatment of mandibular primary
molars with carious pulpal involvement. Int J Paediatr Dent 2012;22:217-227.
9. Jaya AR, Praveen, Anantharaj A, et al. In Vivo evaluation of lesion sterilization and tissue repair in primary
teeth pulp therapy using two antibiotic drug combinations. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2012;37:189-192.
10. Grewal N, Sharma N, Chawla S. Comparison of resorption rate of primary teeth treated with alternative
lesion sterilization and tissue repair and conventional endodontic treatment: An in vivo randomized clinical
trial. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2018;36:262-7
11. Wankhade AD, Kumar R, Singh RK, Chandra A. Root length Length Determination by Different Methods in
Primary Teeth: An In Vivo Study. Pediatr Dent 2013;35(2):E38-E42
12. Coll JA, Josell S, Casper JS. Evaluation of a one-appointment formocresol pulpectomy technique for
primary molars. Pediatr Dent. 1985;7(2):123-129.
13. Rawson TH, Rayes S, Strizich G, Salazar CH. Longitudinal Study Comparing Pulpectomy and Pulpotomy
Treatments for Primary Molars of Alaska Native Children. Pediatr Dent 2019;41(3):214-20.
14. Moranker R, Goya A, Gauba K, et al. Manual versus rotary instrumentation for primary molar pulpectomiesA 24 months randomized clinical trial. Pediatr Dent J 2018;28:96-102.
15. Subramaniam P, Tabrez TA, Girish Babu KL. Microbiological Assessment of Root Canals Following Use of
Rotary and Manual Instruments in Primary Molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;38:123-128
16. Kummer TR, Calvo MC, Cordeiro MMR et al. Ex vivo study of manual and rotary instrumentation techniques
in human primary teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105:e84-e92.
17. George S, Anandaraj S, Issac JS, John SA, Harris A. Rotary endodontics in primary teeth - A review. The
Saudi Dent J Jan 2016;28(1):12-72016. (Coll, Arikan 2016, Holan, Flaitz, Sari)
18. Coll JA, Josell S, Nassof S. et al. An evaluation of pulpal therapy in primary incisors. Pediatr Dent
1988;10(3):178-184
19. Arikan V, Sonmez H, Sari S. Comparison of Two Base Materials Regarding Their Effect on Root Canal Treatment
Success in Primary Molars with Furcation Lesions. BioMed research international 2016;2016:1429286.
Epub 2016 Nov 10.
20. Holan, G, Fuks AB. A comparison of pulpectomies using ZOE and KRI paste in primary molars: a retrospective
study. Pediatr Dent 1993;15(6):403-407
21. Flaitz, C. M.; Barr, E. S.; Hicks, M. J. Radiographic evaluation of pulpal therapy for primary anterior teeth.
ASDC J Dent Child 1989 May-Jun;56(3):182-185.
22. Sari S, Okte Z. Success rate of Sealapex in root canal treatment for primary teeth: 3-year follow-up. Oral
Surg Oral Med Oral Path Oral Radiol Endod 2008 Apr;105(4):e93-96.
23. Memarpour M, Shahidi S Meshki R. Comparison of different obturation techniques for primary molars by
digital radiography. Pediatr Dent 2013 May-Jun;35(3):236-40.
24. Rocha MJ, Cardoso M. Survival analysis of endodontically treated traumatized primary teeth. Dent
Traumatol Dec 2007;23(6):340-7
25. Rafatjou R, Yousefimashouf R, Farhadian M, Afzalsoltani S. Evaluation of the antimicrobial efficacy of two
combinations of drugs on bacteria taken from infected primary teeth (in vitro). Eur Arch Paediatr Dent
2019 Dec;20(6):609-615.
26. Hobson P. Pulp treatment of deciduous teeth. 2. Clinical investigation. Br Dent J 1970 Mar 17;128(6):275-
82 concl.
27. Stallaert KM, Sigal MJ, Titley KV, Andrews PB. A retrospective study of root canal therapy in non-vital
primary molars. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2016;17(4):295-300
28. Coll, J. A.; Sadrian, R. Predicting pulpectomy success and its relationship to exfoliation and succedaneous
dentition. Pediatr Dent 1996;18(1):57-63.
29. Panchal V, Jeevanandan G, Subramanian,EMG. Comparison of post-operative pain after root canal
instrumentation with hand K-files, H-files and rotary Kedo-S files in primary teeth: a randomised clinical
trial. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2019 Oct;20(5)467-472.
30. Topcuoglu G, Topcuoglu HS, Delikan E et al. Postoperative pain after root canal preparation with hand and
rotary files in primary molar teeth. Pediatr Dent 2017 May 15;39(3):192-196.
31. Sevekar SA, Gowda SHN. Postoperative pain and flare-ups: comparison of incidence between single and
multiple visit pulpectomy in primary molars J Clin Diagn Res 2017 Mar;11(3):ZC09-ZC12
32. Schwendicke F, Brouwer F, Stolpe M. Calcium hydroxide versus mineral trioxide aggregate for direct pulp
capping: A cost-effectiveness analysis. J Endod 2015;41(12):1969-74.
33. Yarbrough C, Vujicic M, Aravamudhan K, Schwartz S, Grau B. An analysis of dental spending among
children with pri-vate dental benefits. Health Policy Institute Research Brief, American Dental Association,
Chicago, Ill. April, 2016 (Revised). Available at: “http://www.ada.org/~/media/ADA/ Science%20and%20
Research/HPI/Files/HPIBrief_0316_ 3.pdf ”. Accessed July 10, 2017. (Archived in WebCite® at: “http://
www.webcitation.org/6tVCB0KEY”)
34. Caffrey E, Tate AR, Cashion SW. Are your kids covered? Medicaid coverage for essential oral health
benefits, September 2017. Technical brief. Pediatric Oral Health Re-search and Policy Center. American
Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Chicago, Ill. Available at: “http://www.aapd.org /policy_center/technical_
briefs/#kidscovered”. Accessed September 22, 2017. (Archived in WebCite® at: “http:// www.webcitation.
org/6tfiKKsWT”)
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Latin American Pediatric Dentistry Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
