Abstracts on this page have been chosen and edited by Dr Trevor Watts
Abstract
Given meticulous treatment, there appeared to be no difference in outcome of the two groups.
Main
Gesi A, Hakeberg M et al. Oral Surg 2006; 101: 379–388
One visit treatment of vital pulp conditions may be appropriate because infection is more limited than with a non-vital condition. This randomised trial compared 1- and 2-visit treatment of vital pulp conditions. From 295 patients assessed, 256 were accepted and randomised to the groups, and 12 were wholly lost to follow-up; 90% attended at 2- or 3-yr recalls or both; 72% attended the 3-yr recall. The 2-visit treatment used a calcium hydroxide dressing between visits.
Pain was reported in 80% of patients preoperatively, and in 13% postoperatively. Most postoperative pain was in teeth which had been overfilled (P < 0.001), and pain did not differ significantly between groups. Preoperative radiography identified small periapical radiolucencies in 16% of patients, evenly divided between groups. Periapical lesions were present in 7% (17) of patients at 3 yrs and were evenly distributed between groups. In 13 patients, the lesions had been observed at 1 yr. The authors conclude that with aseptic conditions and proper instrumentation and filling, the 2-visit approach had no advantage.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Incidence of periapical lesions and clinical symptoms after pulpectomy – a clinical and radiographic evaluation of 1- versus 2-session treatment. Br Dent J 200, 563 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4813676
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4813676