 |
| Title |
Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) is a Good Alternative Wound Dressing Than Formocresol (FC) for Pulpotomies in Primary Teeth |
| Clinical Question |
Does MTA work as effectively as a pulpal medicament as FC in pulpotomies of primary molars? |
| Clinical Bottom Line |
MTA is a good alternative treatment to FC for pulpotomies in primary teeth with lower failure rates less internal root resorption. (See Comments on the CAT below) |
| Best Evidence |
(you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link) |
| PubMed ID |
Author / Year |
Patient Group |
Study type
(level of evidence) |
| #1) 17138165 | Peng/2006 | 6 Studies | Meta-analysis | | Key results | MTA versus FC pulpotomy suggested that MTA was superior to FC in pulpotomy resulting in a lower failure rate, with the RR (Relative Risk) being 0.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.11 to 0.90) and 0.31 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.74), respectively. Internal root resorption happened less in the MTA group with RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.77." quoted from Abstract | |
| Evidence Search |
"formocresol" [Supplementary Concept]) AND "mineral trioxide aggregate" [Supplementary Concept] AND “Pulpotomy”[Mesh] ...view in PubMed |
Comments on
The Evidence |
The highest level of evidence (Meta-analysis) demonstrated improved treatment outcome when using MTA wound dressing compared with FC. |
| Applicability |
Inclusion criteria for reviewed studies specified that “all teeth were primary molar teeth with exposure of vital pulp by caries or trauma, with no internal root resorption, interradicular and periapical bone destruction, periodontium involvement, swelling, nor sinus tract, [and that] all teeth would be restorable with posterior stainless steel crowns.” |
| Specialty/Discipline |
(Public Health) (Endodontics) (General Dentistry) (Pediatric Dentistry) (Restorative Dentistry) |
| Keywords |
FERRIC SULFATE; FORMOCRESOL; MINERAL TRIOXIDE AGGREGATE; PRIMARY TEETH; PULP THERAPY
|
| ID# |
471 |
| Date of submission: |
01/06/2010 Revised: 08/16/2011 |
| E-mail |
cooperrb@uthscsa.edu |
| Author |
Rachel Foster |
| Co-author(s) |
R. Bryn Cooper |
| Co-author(s) e-mail |
|
| Faculty mentor/Co-author |
Lina M. Cardenas, DDS |
| Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail |
|
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?) |
post a rationale |
| None available | |
|
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS', FACULTY, RESIDENTS and/or STUDENTS COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs) |
post a comment |
by Luciana Torres (San Antonio,TX) on 04/08/2012
I conducted a Pubmed search on this topic, April 2012. A more recent publication was found: Pubmed ID:18534173. This meta analaysis included 18 RCTs and 10 CTs totaling in 1260 molars that compared MTA and FC. The results of the study further strengthens the conclusion of this CAT. | |
|
|
