Ferric Sulfate Versus Calcium-Enriched Mixture Cement in Pulpotomy of Primary Molars: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Comprehensive review of composition, properties, clinical applications, and future perspectives of calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement: a systematic analysis

This review aims to comprehensively explore calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement as a crucial biomaterial in dentistry/endodontics. With its growing clinical relevance, there is a need to evaluate its composition, chemical/physical/biological properties, clinical applications, and future perspectives to provide clinicians/researchers with a detailed understanding of its potential in endodontic procedures. Through systematic analysis of available evidence, we assess the advantages/limitations of CEM cement, offering valuable insights for informed decision-making in dental/endodontic practice. Our findings highlight the commendable chemical/physical properties of CEM cement, including handling characteristics, alkalinity, color stability, bioactivity, biocompatibility, sealing ability, and antimicrobial properties. Importantly, CEM cement has shown the potential in promoting regenerative processes, such as dentinogenesis and cementogenesis. It has demonstrated successful outcomes in various clinical applications, including vital pulp therapy techniques, endodontic surgery, open apices management, root resorption/perforation repair, and as an orifice/root canal obturation material. The efficacy and reliability of CEM cement in diverse clinical scenarios underscore its effectiveness in endodontic practice. However, we emphasize the need for well-designed clinical trials with long-term follow-up to further substantiate the full potential of CEM cement. This review serves as a robust reference for researchers/practitioners, offering an in-depth exploration of CEM cement and its multifaceted roles in contemporary dentistry/endodontics.

Outcome assessment methods of bioactive and biodegradable materials as pulpotomy agents in primary and permanent teeth: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pulpotomy procedures aiming to preserve and regenerate the dentin-pulp complex have recently increased exponentially due to developments in the field of biomaterials and tissue engineering in primary and permanent teeth. Although the number of studies in this domain has increased, there is still scarcity of evidence in the current literature.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Report the methods of outcome assessment of pulpotomy clinical trials in both primary and permanent teeth; (2) Identify the various bioactive agents and biodegradable scaffolds used in pulpotomy clinical trials in both primary and permanent teeth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review of the literature was performed, including a search of primary studies on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest and Clinicaltrials.gov. A search for controlled trials or randomized controlled trials published between 2012 and 2023 involving primary or permanent teeth receiving partial or full pulpotomy procedures using bioactive/regenerative capping materials was performed.

RESULTS

127 studies out of 1038 articles fulfilled all the inclusion criteria and were included in the current scoping review. More than 90% of the studies assessed clinical and radiographic outcomes. Histological, microbiological, or inflammatory outcomes were measured in only 9.4% of all included studies. Majority of the studies (67.7%) involved primary teeth. 119 studies used non-degradable bioactive cements, while biodegradable scaffolds were used by 32 studies, natural derivates and plant extracts studies were used in only 7 studies. Between 2012 (4 studies) and 2023 (11 studies), there was a general increase in the number of articles published. India, Egypt, Turkey, and Iran were found to have the highest total number of articles published (28, 28,16 and 10 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Pulpotomy studies in both primary and permanent teeth relied mainly on subjective clinical and radiographic outcome assessment methods and seldom analyzed pulpal inflammatory status objectively. The use of biodegradable scaffolds for pulpotomy treatments has been increasing with an apparent global distribution of most of these studies in low- to middle-income countries. However, the development of a set of predictable outcome measures as well as long-term evidence from well conducted clinical trials for novel pulpotomy dressing materials are still required.

COMPARING THE CLINICAL AND RADIOGRAPHIC OUTCOMES OF PULPOTOMIES IN PRIMARY MOLARS USING BIOACTIVE ENDODONTIC MATERIALS AND FERRIC SULFATE - A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of pulpotomies in primary molars using bioactive endodontic materials and ferric sulfate.

DESIGN

The search was conducted in PubMed, Ebscohost, ProQuest, and Scopus databases till June 2021. Children undergoing pulpotomy therapy in primary molars treated with ferric sulfate (FS) and bioactive endodontic materials were evaluated for clinical and radiographic success. Meta-analysis was performed on a random-effects model to assess the success at 6,12,18, and 24 months. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials RESULTS: No significant difference was observed between Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and FS at 24 months for both clinical [RR0.98 (95%CI 0.15,6.34), I² = 0%] and radiographic [RR0.74 (95%CI: 0.23,2.43), I² = 0%] success. At 6 months [RR1.36 (95%CI: 0.10,19.34), I² = 33%], no difference was observed in the clinical [RR1.00 (95%CI: 0.95,1.05), I² = 0%] and radiographic success [RR0.99 (95%CI: 0.88,1.11), I² = 51%] between Biodentine (BD), FS and radiographic success of calcium enriched cement and FS [RR0.25 (95%CI: 0.03, 2.22), I² = 0%].

CONCLUSION

Amongst bioactive materials, MTA and FS demonstrated equal success rates in both clinical and radiographic outcomes with follow-up periods of up to 24 months. Future, high-quality trials are required to verify the result of the current review.