Introduction The purpose of the present study was to evaluate and compare the short-term clinical outcomes of direct pulp capping using ProRoot MTA (Dentsply, Tulsa, OK) or Endocem (Maruchi, Wonju, Korea) as capping materials in a prospective randomized controlled study.
Materials and Methods This study was conducted with subjects who were recruited from the pool of patients from the Department of Conservative Dentistry at the Dental College of Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, between January and May 2013. Of the 48 teeth confirmed to be eligible for direct pulp capping, a total of 46 teeth were randomly assigned to either the ProRoot MTA or the Endocem group (23 teeth per group). Direct pulp capping was performed using these 2 materials, and clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed at 1, 2, 4, and 12 weeks after the treatments. Teeth with no response to pulp vitality test and those exhibiting clinical or radiographic signs and/or symptoms of irreversible pulpitis or pulp necrosis were considered to be failures.
Results Thirty-two patients (43 teeth) were examined at the 3-month follow-up (patient recall rate = 91.4%); 22 of these teeth were in the ProRoot MTA group, and 21 were in the Endocem group. The overall success rate was 93%, and the success rates in the ProRoot MTA and Endocem groups were 95.5% (21/22 teeth) and 90.5% (19/21 teeth), respectively. Statistical analyses of these success rates did not reveal any significant difference between the groups (P =.522).
Conclusions In this randomized controlled study, no significant difference in the short-term clinical outcomes of direct pulp capping using ProRoot MTA or Endocem as the capping material was found. Furthermore, the favorable short-term outcome success rate of 93% indicates that direct pulp capping may be a reliable treatment for pulp exposure in adult teeth.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes