RESUMEN
Background: Pulpotomy is the most common pulp treatment of primary molars, where surgical amputation of infected coronal pulp results in preserving the vitality and function of radicular pulp. With introduction of newer materials, the emphasis has shifted towards regeneration, in this scenario; novel materials such as platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) and propolis (PS) have been considered. Materials and Methods: This was a single-blind in vivo study; ninety human primary teeth from children aged between 5 and 10 years were divided into three equal groups in whom pulpotomy procedure was performed and they were recalled after 3- and 6-month interval for histological evaluation. Observations were subjected to statistical analysis using Pearson's Chi-square test. Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the three materials with respect to inflammatory response, soft-tissue organization, and dentin bridge formation (P > 0.05). Majority of the samples in both growth factor and propolis exhibited dentin bridges at the interface of the exposed pulp, bringing or attempting to bridge the site exposed to the pulpotomy material. The ability of the material to evoke a foreign and inflammatory cell response in the pulpal tissue was not significant. The samples of both formocresol and growth factor group showed signs of pulpal necrosis which revealed the presence of a mild necrotic zone in one specimen at 3 months. One specimen from the propolis group showed mild areas of necrosis at the end of 6 months, where none of the specimens in the growth factor group showed areas of necrosis at the end of 6 months. Conclusion: The results of the present study showed a positive outcome for growth factor and propolis groups. Further clinical trials with a larger sample size and long-term review have to be conducted for the material to be used widely.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Orofacial pain is a common encounter in dentistry (affecting 12% of the population) and is a primary reason for patients seeking emergency care. Dentists often prescribe oral analgesics, which have disadvantages of decreased absorption rates and delayed onset. Intranasal (IN) delivery takes advantage of a large surface area of mucosal tissue for rapid absorption. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of IN ketorolac for endodontic pain using a randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled parallel design study. MATERIALS & METHODS: Twenty patients presenting with moderate to severe endodontic pain were selected to receive IN treatment with placebo (n = 10) or ketorolac (n = 10) 30 minutes before endodontic treatment was started and immediately after the completion of endodontic treatment. Baseline pain levels were recorded before IN treatment. Pain levels were also recorded at 15 and 30 minutes after the initial IN dosing (before endodontic treatment); 30 minutes after completion of endodontic treatment; and 4, 8, and 12 hours after the initial IN spray. RESULTS: IN ketorolac alone or with endodontic treatment showed significantly better pain relief compared with IN placebo spray alone or with endodontic treatment at 30 minutes after the first or second intranasal dose and at 4 hours after the first intranasal dose. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that IN ketorolac may provide a novel and efficacious method for pain relief in endodontic pain patients. How to cite the article: Maroli S, Srinath HP, Goinka C, Yadav NS, Bhardwaj A, Varghese RK. Sniffing out pain: An in vivo intranasal study of analgesic efficacy. J Int Oral Health 2014;6(1):66-71.