These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Selective Removal to Soft Dentine versus Full Pulpotomy for Management of Proximal Deep Carious Lesions: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial.
    Author: R R, Wani W, Sharma S, Kumar V, Chawla A, Kalaivani M, Logani A.
    Journal: Caries Res; 2023; 57(4):536-545. PubMed ID: 37552970.
    Abstract:
    The management of the deep carious lesion with reversible pulpitis is a dilemma for the dentist. The current study compared selective removal to soft dentine (SRSD) and full pulpotomy (FP) for treating proximal deep carious lesions in teeth with reversible pulpitis. Visual-tactile examination and bitewing radiographs were used to determine the depth of carious lesion, and American Association of Endodontists recommendations were used to formulate pulp diagnosis. Sixty mandibular molar teeth from healthy patients between the ages of 16-35 years and a diagnosis of proximal deep carious lesion with reversible pulpitis were included. Teeth were randomly allocated to two study groups. SRSD group (n = 30): soft dentine was preserved over the pulpal aspect. A hard-setting calcium hydroxide cement liner and resin-modified glass ionomer cement base were applied over the remaining soft carious dentine. FP group (n = 30): complete caries removal followed by mineral trioxide aggregate FP was performed. The teeth in both groups were restored with composite resin restoration. The established criteria for outcome assessment of SRSD and pulpotomy were used. Accordingly, only asymptomatic teeth with no radiological evidence of periapical rarefaction were considered successful at the 12-month follow-up. Two-sample t test, Pearson χ2 test/Fisher's exact test, and percentage agreement were used for statistical evaluation. According to the per-protocol analysis, the success rate of both SRSD and FP treatment was 95.45% and 95.65%, respectively, and the actual difference between the two treatments was 1% (95% CI: [-10, 9]). The data suggests that both treatments (SRSD and FP) appear to have a good success rate (>95%) when used to manage permanent mandibular molar teeth with proximal deep carious lesion and reversible pulpitis. As SRSD is a noninvasive procedure, it should be favored over FP in these instances.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]