RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Calcium hydroxide is the most commonly used material in indirect pulp treatment (IPT). However, its drawbacks required its replacement by other materials. AIM: This study aims to estimate clinically and radiographically the success of indirect pulp treatment of young permanent molars with either photo-activated oral disinfection (PAD) or calcium hydroxide. DESIGN: This Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial included 32 vital first permanent molars with deep caries that were treated by indirect pulp treatment with either PAD (group 1) or calcium hydroxide (group 2). Clinical and radiographic success in addition to newly-formed dentin thickness were evaluated regularly at 2, 6, 9, and 12 months. RESULTS: The success for both groups was 100% clinically and radiographically at all follow-up periods. Regarding the mean thickness of newly-formed dentin for both groups at different follow-up periods, there was no statistically significant difference between both groups at 2, 6, 9, and 12 months, with P values = 0.825, 0.146, 0.280, and 0.400, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical and radiographic success for indirect pulp treatment of young permanent molars with both PAD and calcium hydroxide were comparable.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is no scientific evidence supporting the choice of luting cement for cementation of zirconia crowns. AIM: The purpose of this split-mouth study was to compare the efficacy of using bioactive cement versus packable glass ionomer for cementation of posterior pediatric zirconia crowns. DESIGN: Fifty first mandibular primary molars were restored by zirconia crowns and were randomly divided to be luted with either (a) bioactive cement or (b) packable glass ionomer. Crowns' retention, fracture, and gingival condition were evaluated at 1 week, and 1-, 3-, 6-, 9-, 12-, 18-, 24-, and 36-month intervals. Statistical analysis was carried out using Fisher's exact test, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: At 3- to 36-month follow-ups, there were statistically significant (P = .009-≤.001) less debonded crowns in packable glass ionomer group. There were no fractured crowns for either cements. There was no statistically significant difference between gingival index scores. CONCLUSIONS: Packable glass ionomer is more retentive than bioactive cement when used for cementing zirconia pediatric crowns. Posterior zirconia pediatric crowns have high fracture resistance after 36 months of clinical performance, irrespective of luting cement. Luting cement for zirconia pediatric crowns has no apparent effect on gingival condition around crowns.
