Comparative Clinical and Radiographic Success Rate of Bioceramic Premix vs Biosilicate-based Medicament as Indirect Pulp Treatment Materials in Primary Molars: A Double-blind Randomized Trial with a Follow-up of 12 Months.
{"title":"Comparative Clinical and Radiographic Success Rate of Bioceramic Premix vs Biosilicate-based Medicament as Indirect Pulp Treatment Materials in Primary Molars: A Double-blind Randomized Trial with a Follow-up of 12 Months.","authors":"Payal Kothari, Aditi Mathur, Sunnypriyatham Tirupathi, Rashmi Chauhan, Meenakshi Nankar, Ashrita Suvarna","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic success of NeoPUTTY® and Biodentine™ as indirect pulp treatment (IPT) materials in primary molars.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This clinical trial was conducted on children aged 5-9 years. Class I carious lesions in primary molars indicated for IPT were divided into two groups-group I, NeoPUTTY®, and group II, Biodentine™. IPC was performed as per the standard protocols. The treated teeth were evaluated for clinical and radiographic success, along with the presence of a dentinal bridge at 6 and 12 months, by three blind examiners independently. All the data were tabulated, and statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interexaminer reliability was analyzed using Fleiss κ statistics, and it showed \"good\" agreement. Clinical success was 100% in both groups at 6- and 12-month follow-up, while radiographic success was also 100% at 6-month follow-up for both groups. However, at 12-month follow-up, it was 93.33% for group I and 100% for group II. The difference was statistically nonsignificant. The presence of a dentinal bridge at 12-month follow-up was seen in 86.66% of cases in group I and 100% of cases in group II, but there was no statistical difference observed between them with a <i>p</i>-value of 0.555.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limitations of the study, we conclude that NeoPUTTY® and Biodentine™ are equally effective as IPT agents in primary teeth.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Kothari P, Mathur A, Tirupathi S, <i>et al.</i> Comparative Clinical and Radiographic Success Rate of Bioceramic Premix vs Biosilicate-based Medicament as Indirect Pulp Treatment Materials in Primary Molars: A Double-blind Randomized Trial with a Follow-up of 12 Months. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024;17(7):748-753.</p>","PeriodicalId":36045,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11451907/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2871","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic success of NeoPUTTY® and Biodentine™ as indirect pulp treatment (IPT) materials in primary molars.
Materials and methods: This clinical trial was conducted on children aged 5-9 years. Class I carious lesions in primary molars indicated for IPT were divided into two groups-group I, NeoPUTTY®, and group II, Biodentine™. IPC was performed as per the standard protocols. The treated teeth were evaluated for clinical and radiographic success, along with the presence of a dentinal bridge at 6 and 12 months, by three blind examiners independently. All the data were tabulated, and statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test.
Results: Interexaminer reliability was analyzed using Fleiss κ statistics, and it showed "good" agreement. Clinical success was 100% in both groups at 6- and 12-month follow-up, while radiographic success was also 100% at 6-month follow-up for both groups. However, at 12-month follow-up, it was 93.33% for group I and 100% for group II. The difference was statistically nonsignificant. The presence of a dentinal bridge at 12-month follow-up was seen in 86.66% of cases in group I and 100% of cases in group II, but there was no statistical difference observed between them with a p-value of 0.555.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, we conclude that NeoPUTTY® and Biodentine™ are equally effective as IPT agents in primary teeth.
How to cite this article: Kothari P, Mathur A, Tirupathi S, et al. Comparative Clinical and Radiographic Success Rate of Bioceramic Premix vs Biosilicate-based Medicament as Indirect Pulp Treatment Materials in Primary Molars: A Double-blind Randomized Trial with a Follow-up of 12 Months. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024;17(7):748-753.