|
Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | Submissions | Subscribe | Contact | Dental Links |

| Home |
| Current Issue |
| Past Issues |
| Submissions |
| Subscribe |
| Contact |
| Dental Links |
Fall 2001: Volume
26, Number 1 |
|
| Clinical
Research for a Better Practice |
|
| Histological evaluation of
electrosurgery and formocresol pulpotomy techniques in primary
teeth in dogs |
|
The purpose of this study was
to compare pulpal and periapical tissue reactions to electrosurgery
versus formocresol pulpotomy techniques in the primary teeth of
dogs. The study was conducted on 33 primary teeth of three mongrel
dogs between the ages of one to three months. Each dog had three
teeth treated by Formocresol Pulpotomy with Mechanical Coronal
Pulp Removal (FC), three teeth treated by Electrosurgery Pulpotomy
with Mechanical Coronal Pulp Removal (ES/MCPR), three teeth treated
by Electrosurgery Pulpotomy with Electrosurgical Coronal Pulp
Removal (ES/ECPR), and two teeth serving as untreated Controls.
Dogs one, two and three were sacrificed performing the pulpotomies
at two, four and six weeks, respectively. The pulp, periapical
tissue and after surrounding bone were submitted to histological
examination and the histological reaction was recorded. The results
were fourteen out of 18 unfavorable and zero out of three favorable
histological reactions occurred in the FC treated teeth. Six out
of 18 unfavorable and one out of three favorable histological
reactions occurred in the ES/MCPR treated teeth. Nine out of 18 unfavorable and two out of three favorable histological reactions occurred in the ES/ECPR treated teeth. One out of 18 unfavorable and zero out of three favorable histological reactions occurred in the untreated Control teeth. The conclusion of this study is that of the three experimental groups, the teeth treated by Electrosurgery Pulpotomy with either Mechanical or Electrosurgical Coronal Pulp Removal exhibited less histopathological reaction than the teeth treated by Formocresol Pulpotomy. |
|
| Full Text | |
| © 2007 The Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry |