Comparing MTA and Calcium Hydroxide for Treating Immature Teeth
Author Information
Author(s): Aurélie Beslot-Neveu, Eric Bonte, Bruno Baune, Raphaël Serreau, Fawzia Aissat, Laure Quinquis, Sophie Grabar, Jean-Jacques Lasfargues
Primary Institution: Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris
Hypothesis
In children with pulp necrosis of a permanent immature incisor, MTA is not better than calcium hydroxide in the rates of a calcified apical barrier, but MTA is more valuable to achieve a biologic periapical barrier before 6 months.
Conclusion
The study aims to determine if MTA is more effective than calcium hydroxide in creating a calcified barrier in non-vital immature teeth.
Supporting Evidence
- Pulp necrosis is a common issue in children with dental trauma.
- Apexification is necessary for immature teeth with pulp necrosis.
- Calcium hydroxide has been traditionally used but has several drawbacks.
- MTA may offer advantages over calcium hydroxide in apexification.
- The study aims to provide comparative data on these two materials.
Takeaway
This study is trying to find out if a new material called MTA works better than an old one called calcium hydroxide for fixing teeth that are not growing properly.
Methodology
A randomized controlled trial comparing MTA and calcium hydroxide in 34 children aged 6-18 with non-vital permanent incisors, with follow-ups at 3, 6, and 12 months.
Potential Biases
Potential bias in patient selection and treatment allocation due to the open-label design.
Limitations
The study is limited to a single center and may not be generalizable to all populations.
Participant Demographics
Children aged 6 to 18 years with non-vital permanent incisors.
Statistical Information
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website