International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE S1 ( Special issue-1 (Pediatr Endodont), 2022 ) > List of Articles


Clinical Radiographic Evaluation of 3Mixtatin and MTA in Primary Teeth Pulpotomies: A Randomized Controlled

Rakesh K Chak, Rajeev K Singh, Jhansi Mutyala, Nidesh K Killi

Keywords : 3Mixtatin, Biodentin, Primary molars, Pulpotomy

Citation Information :

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2216

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 28-02-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Introduction: The present study evaluates the efficiency of 3Mixtatin (a combination of Simvastatin and 3Mix antibiotics) in comparison with Mineral Trioxide Aggregate in primary molars pulpotomy. Materials and methods: A total of 64 deciduous molar teeth with caries requiring pulpotomy procedure were selected and randomly divided into two treatment groups, Group I- MTA (n = 32), Group II- 3Mixtatin (n = 32). Restoration with Glass Ionomer Cement followed by stainless steel crowns was done after pulpotomy procedure. The clinical and radiographical analysis was done in the subsequent follow-up periods of 3, 6, 9, and12 months simultaneously. Result: Both groups showed equal success rates, without any significant difference between the MTA and 3mixtatin groups clinically (success rate of 93.8%)and radiographically higher success rate was seen with 3Mixtatin (78% success rate). Conclusion: 3mixtatin showed similar clinical and better radiographical success rate to MTA. Therefore, 3mixtatin may be a potential alternate pulpotomy medicament in primary teeth. Key messages: In the present study based on the radiographic findings, 78% success rate was seen in the teeth treated with 3Mixtatin, which was higher than the radiographic success rate of MTA (75%). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the use of 3Mix with Simvastatin to treat pulpotomized primary molars by 3Mixtatin.

  1. Gazi-coklica V, Muretic Z, Brcic R, et al. Craniofacial parameters during growth from the deciduous to permanent dentition—a longitudinal study. Eur J Orthod 1997;19(6):681–689. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/19.6.681
  2. Nanda RS. The rates of growth of several facial components measured from serial cephalometric roentgenograms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1955;41(9):658–673. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(55)90112-3
  3. Dawood A, Patel S, Brown J. Cone beam CT in dental practice. Br Dent J 2009;207(1):23. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.560
  4. Dhillon JK, Kalra G. Cone beam computed tomography: an innovative tool in pediatric dentistry. J Pediatr Dent 2013;1(2):27. DOI: 10.4103/WKMP-0028.117440
  5. De Moraes ME, Hollender LG, Chen CS, et al. Evaluating craniofacial asymmetry with digital cephalometric images and cone-beam computed tomographyAm J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139(6):e523–531. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.10.020
  6. Cevidanes LH, Oliveira AE, Grauer D et al. Clinical application of 3D imaging for assessment of treatment outcomes Semin Orthod 2011;17(1):72–80. WBSaunders. DOI: 10.1053/j.sodo.2010.08.012
  7. Damstra J, Fourie Z, Ren Y. Comparison between two-dimensional and midsagittal three dimensional cephalometric measurements of dry human skulls. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;49(5):392–395. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2010.06.006
  8. Gribel BF, Gribel MN, Manzi FR, et al. From 2D to 3D: an algorithm to derive normal values for 3-dimensional computerized assessment Angle Orthod 2011;81(1):3–10. DOI: 10.2319/032910-173.1
  9. Fuyamada M, Nawa H, Shibata M et al. Reproducibility of landmark identification in the jaw and teeth on 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography images: a preliminary study oftentative methods compared to those based on cephalometric definitions Angle Orthod 2011;81(5):843–849. DOI: 10.2319/010711-5.1
  10. Rossini G, Cavallini C, Cassetta M et al. 3D cephalometric analysis obtained from computed tomography. Review of the literature. Ann Stomatol (Roma) 2011;2(3–4):31.
  11. Schlicher W, Nielsen I, Huang JC et al. Consistency and precision of landmark identification in three dimensiona lcone beam computed tomography scans. Eur J Orthod 2012;34(3):263–275. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjq144
  12. Tarazona B, Llamas JM, Cibrian R et al. A comparison between dental measurements taken from CBCT models and those taken from a digital method Eur J Orthod 2013;35(1):1–6. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjr005
  13. Holan G, Eidelman E, Fuks AB. Long-term evaluation of pulpotomy in primary molars using mineral trioxide aggregate or formocresol. Pediatr Dent 2005;27(2):129–136. PMID: 15926290.
  14. Sushynski JM, Zealand CM, Botero TM, et al. Comparison of gray mineral trioxide aggregate and diluted formocresol in pulpotomized primary molars: a 6-to 24-month observation. Pediatr Dent 2012;34(5):120–128. PMID: 23211896; PMCID: PMC4889335.
  15. Doyle WA. Formocresol versus calcium hydroxide in pulpotomy. J Den Child 1962;29:86–97. DOI: 10.1177/00220345650440050401
  16. Duarte MA, Demarchi AC, Yamashita JC, et al. pH and calcium ion release of 2 root-end filling materials. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003;95(3):345–347. DOI: 10.1067/moe.2003.12
  17. Monteiro Bramante C, Demarchi AC, de Moraes IG, et al. Presence of arsenic in different types of MTA and white and gray Portland cement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106(6):909–913. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.07.018
  18. Camilleri J. Characterization of hydration products of mineral trioxide aggregate. Int Endod J 2008;41(5):408–417. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01370.x
  19. Torabinejad M, Parirokh M, Dummer PM. Mineral trioxide aggregate and other bioactive endodontic cements: an updated overview–part II: other clinical applications and complications. Int Endod J 2018;51(3): 284–317. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12843
  20. Okamoto Y, Sonoyama W, Ono M, et al. Simvastatin induces the odontogenic differentiation of human dental pulp stem cells in vitro and in vivo. J Endod 2009;35(3):367–372. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.11.024
  21. Jung IY, Lee SJ, Hargreaves KM. Biologically based treatment of immature permanent teeth with pulpal necrosis: a case series. J Endod 2008;34(7):876–887. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.03.023
  22. Aminabadi NA, Huang B, Samiei M, et al. A randomized trial using 3Mixtatin compared to MTA in primary molars with inflammatory root resorption: a novel endodontic biomaterial. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;40(2):95–102. DOI: 10.17796/1053-4628-40.2.95
  23. Aminabadi NA, Satrab S, Najafpour E, et al. A randomized trial of direct pulp capping in primary molars using MTA compared to 3Mixtatin: a novel pulp capping biomaterial. Int J Paediatr Dent 2016;26(4):281–290. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12196
  24. Gruythuysen RJ, Weerheijm KL. Calcium hydroxide pulpotomy with a light-cured cavity-sealing material after two years. ASDC J Dent Child 1997;64(4):251–253. PMID: 9328675.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.