View the CAT printer-friendly / share this CAT
Title ZOE Pulpectomies In Primary Teeth To Not Increase Discoloration Of Permanent Successors, But May Alter Their Eruption By 20%
Clinical Question Do young patients with necrotic pulps in primary teeth that receive pulpectomies with zinc oxide eugenol obturation experience more adverse effects on their succedaneous teeth (such as discoloration or altered eruption) than those who do not receive this treatment?
Clinical Bottom Line Primary teeth with necrotic pulps that receive ZOE pulpectomies do not show increased discoloration but may show altered eruption of the succedaneous teeth. (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) 8668572Coll/1996Young patients recieving pulpectomies- 85 teeth totalNonrandomized split mouth case control
Key resultsThere was no increase in discoloration of the successor to pulpectomized primary teeth compared to contralateral controls. There was a 20% incidence of ectopic eruption of successors to pulpectomized primary teeth. There was an overall 77.8% success rate for pulpectomies in necrotic primary teeth and preoperative root reorption was the most significant predictor of pulpectomy failure and succedaneous tooth discoloration.
Evidence Search pulpectomy and succedaneous teeth
Comments on
The Evidence
The study was retrospective in nature. A prospective randomized clinical trial would present stronger evidence, but this is the best study reporting this particular data. The sample size was moderately large and the contralateral teeth in individual patients served as a control.
Applicability Clinicians providing pediatric endodontic care in primary teeth
Specialty/Discipline (Endodontics) (Pediatric Dentistry) (Restorative Dentistry)
Keywords pulpectomy, primary tooth, ZOE, succedaneous tooth
ID# 808
Date of submission: 03/24/2011spacer
E-mail schulte@livemail.uthscsa.edu
Author Nick Schulte
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor/Co-author Peter T. Gakunga, BDS, MS, PhD
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail GAKUNGA@uthscsa.edu
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
post a comment
by Mohamed Elnazer (San Antonio, TX) on 08/29/2013
I conducted a PubMed search on this topic and I was able to find a more recent evidence by Tannure PN, 2011, PMID #: 21903556. The study is of higher level of evidence as it is a prospective study but still the results are close to the original article used in the CAT.

Return to Found CATs list