Citation Information :
Winnier J, Suresh R. A Comparative Evaluation of a Labial Approach with a Conventional Palatal Approach for Endodontic Access in Primary Maxillary Incisors: A Pilot Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020; 13 (1):53-56.
Aim: A straight-line access provides an uninterrupted path for a successful endodontic procedure and traditionally a palatal approach was used to achieve the same. A labial access opening may provide a straight-line access to the root canal more consistently than the conventional palatal access opening in primary maxillary incisors; its advantages being improved visibility and direct access to the root canal. This study was designed to compare and evaluate the time taken for pulpectomy in primary maxillary incisors with conventional palatal access and labial access as well as time taken for the postendodontic restoration. Materials and methods: A cohort study was conducted wherein pulpectomy was performed on primary maxillary anterior teeth with labial endodontic access (group I—40 teeth) and palatal endodontic access (group II—40 teeth). Each group was further subdivided into two subgroups of 20 teeth each, requiring postendodontic composite restoration and requiring postendodontic strip crown restoration. Time taken for pulpectomy with both methods and for postendodontic restoration was evaluated. Results: The mean time (in seconds) taken for pulpectomy and postendodontic composite restoration was significantly less with a labial access than a palatal access (p = 0.000). Although the time required for postendodontic strip crown restoration was less with a labial access compared with a palatal access, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.907). Conclusion: From the results of this study, it can be suggested that labial endodontic access may be routinely used for pulp therapy of primary anterior teeth. Clinical significance: A labial endodontic access for primary anterior teeth provides a straight-line access and improves operator convenience and patient compliance when compared with a palatal access.
Coll JA, Josell S, Nassof S, et al. An evaluation of pulpal therapy in primary incisors. Pediatr Dent 1988;10(3):178–184.
American academy on pediatric Dentistry Clinical Affairs Committee-behavior Management Subcommittee, American Academy on Pediatric Dentistry Council on Clinical Affairs. . guideline on behavior guidance for the pediatric dental patient. Pediatr Dent 2008;30(7 Suppl):125.
Kuo CI, Wang YL, Chang HH, et al. Application of ni-ti rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent 2005;15(Supplement):65.
Kupietzky A. Bonded resin composite strip crowns for primary incisors: clinical tips for a successful outcome. Pediatr Dent 2002;24(2):145–148.
Kumarihamy SL, Subasinghe LD, Jayasekara P, et al. The prevalence of early childhood caries in 1-2 yrs olds in a semi-urban area of Sri Lanka. BMC Res Notes 2011;4(1):336. DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-336.
Krapež J, Fidler A. Location and dimensions of access cavity in permanent incisors, canines, and premolars. J Conserv Dent 2013;16(5):404. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.117491.
Mannan G, Smallwood ER, Gulabivala K. Effect of access cavity location and design on degree and distribution of instrumented root canal surface in maxillary anterior teeth. Int Endod J 2001;34(3):176–183. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00359.x.
Stambaugh RV, Wittrock JW. The relationship of the pulp chamber to the external surface of the tooth. J Prosthet Dent 1977;37(5):537–546.
Chae MH, Song JS, Choi HJ, et al. Labial approach of pulp treatment and resin restoration on discolored necrotic primary anterior tooth. J Korean Dis Oral Health 2014;10(2):84–88.
George S, Anandaraj S, Issac JS, et al. Rotary endodontics in primary teeth–A review. Saudi Dent J 2016;28(1):12–17. DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2015.08.004.
Crespo S, Cortes O, Garcia C, et al. Comparison between rotary and manual instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008;32(4):295–298.