International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 11 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2018 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

A Nonconventional Approach to Formocresol Pulpotomy

Amitabha Chakraborty, Bibhas Dey, Sinjana Jana

Keywords : Formocresol, Pulpotomy,Access cavity

Citation Information : Chakraborty A, Dey B, Jana S. A Nonconventional Approach to Formocresol Pulpotomy. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2018; 11 (6):490-495.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1563

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-12-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

A different concept of formocresol pulpotomy procedure has been proposed where the formocresol pulpotomy is done with smaller access to the pulp chamber. In our study formocresol pulpotomy was carried out in 128 primary molar teeth with a limited amount of access opening, saving a bit of more tooth structure, which excludes the requirement of placement of a stainless steel crown (SSC). In 2 years follow-up period, no crown fracture was reported. One hundred fifteen teeth remain vital at the end of 2 years period of observation with the periodic clinical and radiographic review. The result shows 89.4% clinical and radiographic success of this nonconventional pulpotomy procedure that corroborates with several studies of the conventional formocresol pulpotomy procedure.


PDF Share
  1. Teplitsky PE, Grieman R J. History of formocresol pulpotomy. J Can Dent Assoc 1984; 50(8):629-634
  2. Sweet CA. Procedure for treatment of exposed and pulpless deciduous teeth. J Am Dent Assoc 1930; 17:1150-1153.
  3. Doyle WA, McDonald RE, Mitchell DF. Formocresol versus calcium hydroxide in pulpotomy. ASDC J Dent Child 1962; 29:86-97.
  4. Redig DF. A comparison and evaluation of two formocresol pulpotomy technics utilizing “Buckley's” formocresol. ASDC J Dent Child 1968;35:22-30.
  5. Morawa AP, Straffon LH, Han SS, and Corpron RE. Clinical evaluation of pulpotomies using dilute formocresol. J Dent Child 1975;42:360-363.
  6. Pruhs RJ, Olen GA, Sharma PS. Relationship between formocresol pulpotomies on primary teeth and enamel defects on their permanent successors. J Am Dent Assoc. 1977;94:698-700.
  7. Myers DR, Pashley DH, Whitford GM, et al. Tissue changes induced by the absorption of formocresol from pulpotomy sites in dogs. Pediatr Dent 1983;5:6-8.
  8. Santanna AT, Spolidorio LC, Ramalho LT. Histological analysis of the association between formocresol and endotoxin in the subcutaneous tissue of mice. Braz Dent J 2008;19(1):40-45.
  9. Milnes AR. Is formocresolobsolute? A fresh look at the evidence concerning safety issues. J Endod 2008;34:S40-46.
  10. Rodd HD, Waterhouse PJ, Fuks AB, et al. Pulp therapy for primary molars. Int J Ped Dent 2006;16 (Suppl 1):15-23.
  11. King SR, McWhorter AG, Seale NS. Concentration of formocresol used by pediatric dentists in primary tooth pulpotomy. Pediatr Dent. 2002;24(2):157-159.
  12. Yoon RK, Chussid S, Davis MJ, et al. Preferred treatment methods for primary tooth vital pulpotomies. A survey. N Y State Dent J. 2008;74(2):47-49.
  13. Walker LA, Sanders BJ, Jones JE, et al. Current trends in pulp therapy: a survey analyzing pulpotomy techniques taught in pediatric dental residency programs. J Dent Child 2013 Jan-Apr; 80(1):31-35.
  14. Garcia-Godoy F. Pulpal response to different application times of formocresol. J Pedod 1982;6(2):176-193.
  15. Kurji ZA, Sigal MJ, Andrews P, et al. A retrospective study of a modified 1-minute formocresol pulpotomy technique part 1: clinical and radiographic findings. Pediatr Dent 2011; 33(2):131-138.
  16. Roberts JF. Treatment of vital and non-vital primary molar teeth by one-stage formocresol pulpotomy: clinical success and effect upon age at exfoliation. Int J Paediatr Dent 1996; 6(2):111-115.
  17. Aminabadi NA, Farahani RM, Gajan EB. A clinical study of formocresol pulpotomy versus root canal therapy of vital primary incisors. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2008 Spring; 32(3):211- 214.
  18. Sonmez D, Sari S, Cetinbas T. A Comparison of four pulpotomy techniques in primary molars: a long-term follow-up. J Endod 2008;34(8):950-955.
  19. Yildiz E, Tosun G. Evaluation of formocresol, calcium hydroxide, ferric sulfate, and MTA primary molar pulpotomies. Eur J Dent 2014;8(2):234-240.
  20. Schröder U. Effect of an extra-pulpal blood clot on healing following experimental pulpotomy and capping with calcium hydroxide. Odontol Revy 1973;24:257-268.
  21. Van Dijken JW, Horstedt P. Effect of the use of rubber dam versus cotton rolls on marginal adaptation of composite resin fillings to acid-etched enamel. Acta Odontol Scand. 1987;45(5):303-308.
  22. Hunter ML, Hunter B. Vital pulpotomy in the primary dentition: attitudes and practices of specialists in paediatric dentistry practicing in the United Kingdom. Int J Paeditr Dent 2003;13:246-250.
  23. Carvalho TS, Sampaio FC, Diniz A, et al. Two years survival rate of Class II ART restorations in primary molars using two ways to avoid saliva contamination. Int J Paediatr Dent 2010;20(6):419-425.
  24. Holan G, Fuks AB, Keltz N. Success rate of formocresol pulpotomy in primary molars restored with stainless steel crown vs amalgam. Pediatr Dent 2002;24(3):212-216.
  25. Guelmann M, McIlwain MF, Primosch RE. Radiographic assessment of primary molar pulpotomies restored with resin-based materials. Pediatr Dent 2005;27(1):24-27.
  26. Guelmann M, Fair J, Bimstein E. Permanent versus temporary restorations after emergency pulpotomies in primary molars. Pediatr Dent 2005;27(6):478-481.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.