Skip to content

Evaluation of Hyaluronic Acid Pulpotomies in Primary Molars

Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Formocresol, Ferric Sulfate and Hyaluronic Acid Pulpotomies on Human Primary Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04115358
Enrollment
47
Registered
2019-10-04
Start date
2019-05-01
Completion date
2020-10-01
Last updated
2021-08-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Pulpitis

Keywords

Pulpotomy

Brief summary

In this study, 120 primary molar teeth from healthy children aged between 5 and 9 and who apply to Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pediatric Dentistry will be subjected to pulpotomy treatments. After proper diagnosis of coronal pulpitis, the teeth will be assigned randomly to one of the 3 groups: 40 primary molars for formocresol (FC) pulpotomy treatments, 40 primary molars for ferric sulfate (FS) treatments and 40 primary molars for 0.5% hyaluronic acid gel (HA) pulpotomy treatments. The tooth decay will be removed, the pulp will be amputated from the chamber of the pulp with a sharp excavator and one of the medicament will be applied to the orifice of the root canals. The cavity will be sealed tight with zinc oxide cement, and the primary molars will be restored with a composite filling material or with a stainless steel crown (SSC). A single investigator will perform the procedure. The teeth will be followed clinically and radiographically at 1st, 3rd, 6th, 12th months.

Detailed description

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of the materials used in pulpotomies, and to evaluate the success of hyaluronic gel over the formocresol and/or ferric sulfate considered as the gold standard for this type of treatment. Pulpotomy is an endodontic treatment method aiming to maintain primary molar affected from deep caries and acute pulpitis by removing the effected pulpal tissue, leaving the remaining root canal pulp and maintaining its vitality and function until the tooth exfoliates physiologically. In order to remain canals intact and uninflamed various dental materials are used according to treatment purposes; categorized into three groups as devitalizing, preventive and regenerative treatment. 1. Devitalization: Formocresol, Glutaraldehyde, Electro-surgery 2. Protective: Ferric Sulfate, Calcium Hydroxide, Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, Lasers 3. Regenerative: Bone Morphogenetic Protein, Enriched Collagen The ideal agent or method for pulpotomy treatment of the primary teeth has not been determined yet but the earliest method of diluted formocresol is considered by many the gold standard. Formocresol is a strong strain that fixes living tissues. It contains formaldehyde gas, organic structures, dentin channels and narrow side channels until the bacteria are also fixed. 10% formalin solution (14% formaldehyde) is used as a tissue fixative. Ferric Sulfate an other material for pulpotomy is used in dentistry mainly as a hemostatic agent. It has several advantages over formocresol such as non-mutagenic property and keeping root canal pulp vital. Hyaluronic acid gel, which is a new product as a pulpotomy material, has been used in dentistry as well as medicine for many years. It is distributed widely in epithelial and connective tissues. Medical uses include joint treatments, skin lotions for atopic dermatitis, cosmetic surgery etc. In dentistry, gingivitis, teething, dental surgery including implants and sinus lifting procedures and oral ulcers are main target for hyaluronic acid treatment. This study extends the use of hyaluronic acid to primary tooth endodontics. In this study, 120 primary molar teeth from healthy children aged between 5 and 9 and who apply to Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Pediatric Dentistry will be subjected to pulpotomy treatments. Sample size calculation showed that at first 40 teeth in each group will be required to detect a significant difference (80% power, two-sided 5% significance level). Ethical approval of the study was taken from the Clinical Research Ethics Committee, Faculty of Dentistry at Marmara University (No: 2019/288) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The patients' family will be given information about the pros and cons of the study on the relevant teeth and then a written consent will be obtained. Patients will be selected for this study according to the following criteria: 1. Children who have good cooperation, do not require general anesthesia or sedation, and who do not have any systemic disease, allergic reactions, or any use of medications. 2. No spontaneous, continuous pain in the tooth, no pathological or physiological mobility, no abscess and/or fistula, no tenderness to palpation or percussion. 3. The tooth can be restored with a stainless steel crown (SSC) or a composite filling material after treatment. 4. The physiological resorption in the tooth root not exceeding 1/3. 5. No pathological resorption in the tooth root canals internally and/or externally, no radiolucency in the periapical or furcation regions, no enlargement of periodontal ligaments. Exclusion criteria: 1. Children who have any disorders, spontaneous pain, no restorable primary molars, may exfoliate soon and teeth with apical periodontitis, pulp necrosis, abscess, fistula, swelling or mobility. 2. Families who are not willing to join the study. After proper diagnosis of coronal pulpitis, local anesthesia is administrated, the teeth will be assigned randomly to one of the 3 groups: 40 primary molars for formocresol pulpotomy treatments, 40 primary molars for ferric sulfate treatments and 40 primary molars for 0.5% hyaluronic acid gel pulpotomy treatments. The tooth decay is removed, the roof of the pulp chamber is removed by joining the pulp horns with a bur cut. The coronal pulp is amputated from the chamber of the pulp with a sharp excavator and one or more cotton pellets is placed over the site and pressure is applied. When the hemostasis is insured, one of the medicament is applied to the orifice of the root canals. The cavity will be sealed tight with zinc oxide eugenol cement. The primary molars were restored either with a stainless-steel crown in case of proximal cavities or with a composite filling material in case of occlusal cavities. A single pediatric dentist will perform whole pulpotomy treatments and restorations of all selected teeth. The teeth will be followed clinically and radiographically at 1, 3, 6, 12 months. The teeth will be evaluated clinically and radiographically according to the following criteria: 1. Clinical criteria: Spontaneous pain, tenderness to percussion and/or palpation, pathological mobility and abscess or fistula. 2. Radiographic criteria: Periapical or furcal radiolucency, internal or external root resorption, loss of lamina dura. All evaluations will be performed by two calibrated pediatric dentists. The performing dentist will not be blinded to the treatment materials but the patient and two examiners who evaluated clinical and radiographic findings will be blinded to the treatment.

Interventions

PROCEDUREHyaluronic acid: Gengigel teething

Applying of 0,54% hyaluronic acid for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns and composite filling material.

PROCEDUREFormocresol Buckley formula: Formacresol

Applying of 1/5 diluted formocresol for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns and composite filling material.

PROCEDUREFerric sulfate: ViscoStat

Applying of 20% ferric sulfate for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns and composite filling material.

Sponsors

Marmara University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
5 Years to 9 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* No systemic disease, * No pathological mobility and/or resorption of the tooth, * No pain and/or abscess, * Parents volunteering, * The patients are between 5-9 years old.

Exclusion criteria

* Systemic disease, * Pathological mobility and resorption of the tooth, * Pain and/or abscess, * Non voluntary, * The patients aren't between 5-9 years old.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 GroupsChange from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groupsRadiographic evaluation for any periapical or bifurcal lesion, cyst formation or obliteration
Number of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 GroupsChange from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groupsSensitivity to biting, chewing and clinically to the percussion by a probe
Number of Mobile Teeth in 3 GroupsChange from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groupsMobility of the treated tooth and/or the tooth is sensitive to the vibration
Number of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 GroupsChange from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groupsAny pain history at that time frame and/or complaint of discomfort and pain clinically
Number of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 GroupsChange from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groupsAny sign of chronic pulpitis, redness or swelling of the gingiva and/or fistula at that time frame and clinically
Number of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 GroupsChange from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groupsThe tooth is missing or ready to exfoliate physiologically and no pathology is examined
Number of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsChange from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groupsInternal, external, early or physiological root resorption from periapical/panoramic radiographs

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Restoration StabilityChange from Baseline at 1 monthThe survival rate of stainless steel crown and composite applied to each pulpotomized tooth

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Participant flow

Recruitment details

The first participant was enrolled in May 2019 and the last participant was enrolled in September 2019. No important changes in methods or selection criteria have been done. 1st, 3rd and 6th months assessments were made without complications but 1-year examination had some face to face problems with the Covid-19 pandemics. So some final examinations and patient comforts had been done via phone and/or online connections.

Pre-assignment details

The study was initially carried out on 136 primary molars of 47 children. Three children (2 boys, 1 girl) did not show up in any recalls, so the study was performed in 130 primary molars.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Hyaluronic Acid
Gengigel teething (%0,54 hyaluronic acid), 0,1ml to the orifice of the root canals of the primary molar. Hyaluronic acid: Gengigel teething: Applying of 0,54% hyaluronic acid for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns (SSC) and composite filling material.
34
Hyaluronic Acid
Gengigel teething (%0,54 hyaluronic acid), 0,1ml to the orifice of the root canals of the primary molar. Hyaluronic acid: Gengigel teething: Applying of 0,54% hyaluronic acid for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns (SSC) and composite filling material.
51
Formocresol
0,1 ml to the orifice of the root canals of the primary molar Formocresol Buckley formula: Formacresol: Applying of 1/5 diluted formocresol for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns (SSC) and composite filling material.
33
Formocresol
0,1 ml to the orifice of the root canals of the primary molar Formocresol Buckley formula: Formacresol: Applying of 1/5 diluted formocresol for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns (SSC) and composite filling material.
40
Ferric Sulfate
0,1 ml to the orifice of the root canals of the primary molar Ferric sulfate: ViscoStat: Applying of 20% ferric sulfate for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns (SSC) and composite filling material.
34
Ferric Sulfate
0,1 ml to the orifice of the root canals of the primary molar Ferric sulfate: ViscoStat: Applying of 20% ferric sulfate for one minute to the orifice of root canals of the primary molars, then sealing the chamber with zinc oxide eugenol cement and completing the restoration with stainless steel crowns (SSC) and composite filling material.
39
Total231

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002
Overall Studyexfoliation001

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicTotalFormocresolHyaluronic AcidFerric Sulfate
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
101 Participants33 Participants34 Participants34 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Continuous6.71 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.015
6.83 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.98
6.65 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.99
6.67 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.08
Dental Arch
Lower Arch
65 tooth18 tooth23 tooth24 tooth
Dental Arch
Upper Arch
65 tooth22 tooth28 tooth15 tooth
Dental Arch/Tooth Type
Mandibular 1st primary molars
40 tooth11 tooth14 tooth15 tooth
Dental Arch/Tooth Type
Mandibular 2nd primary molars
25 tooth7 tooth9 tooth9 tooth
Dental Arch/Tooth Type
Maxillary 1st primary molars
27 tooth9 tooth11 tooth7 tooth
Dental Arch/Tooth Type
Maxillary 2nd primary molars
38 tooth13 tooth17 tooth8 tooth
Final Restoration
Composite
41 tooth12 tooth18 tooth11 tooth
Final Restoration
SSC
89 tooth28 tooth33 tooth28 tooth
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Turkey
101 Participants33 Participants34 Participants34 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
80 tooth25 tooth32 tooth23 tooth
Sex: Female, Male
Male
50 tooth15 tooth19 tooth16 tooth
Tooth Type
1st primary molars
67 tooth20 tooth25 tooth22 tooth
Tooth Type
2nd primary molars
63 tooth20 tooth26 tooth17 tooth

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 340 / 330 / 34
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 340 / 330 / 34
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 340 / 330 / 34

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups

Mobility of the treated tooth and/or the tooth is sensitive to the vibration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups1 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups

Mobility of the treated tooth and/or the tooth is sensitive to the vibration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 month in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth extracted from HA group

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups1 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups1 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups

Mobility of the treated tooth and/or the tooth is sensitive to the vibration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 month in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth exfoliated from FS group (1 participant ) so 1 child and 1 tooth is reduced from FS group

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups3 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups2 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups1 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups

Mobility of the treated tooth and/or the tooth is sensitive to the vibration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months in 3 groups

Population: 2 teeth exfoliated from HA group (not participants) so 50 teeth reduced to 48 teeth but participants still exist

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups4 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups4 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Mobile Teeth in 3 Groups3 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups

Sensitivity to biting, chewing and clinically to the percussion by a probe

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months in 3 groups

Population: 2 teeth exfoliated from HA group (not participants) so number of teeth reduced from 50 to 48

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups2 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups6 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups2 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups

Sensitivity to biting, chewing and clinically to the percussion by a probe

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth exfoliated in FS group and 1 participant so no observation for 1 tooth and 1 participant in FS

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups11 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups8 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups3 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups

Sensitivity to biting, chewing and clinically to the percussion by a probe

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth is extracted in HA group so 50 teeth are evaluated

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups10 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups8 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups3 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups

Sensitivity to biting, chewing and clinically to the percussion by a probe

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups7 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups6 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth Sensitive to Percussion in 3 Groups3 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups

Radiographic evaluation for any periapical or bifurcal lesion, cyst formation or obliteration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth is extracted in HA group so 1 tooth is reduced but not participant

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups7 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups3 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups3 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups

Radiographic evaluation for any periapical or bifurcal lesion, cyst formation or obliteration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth exfoliated in FS group so 1 tooth and 1 participant are not evaluated in FS group

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups4 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups4 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups3 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups

Radiographic evaluation for any periapical or bifurcal lesion, cyst formation or obliteration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months in 3 groups

Population: 6 participants, 12 teeth missing for xrays, 2 exfoliations from HA group; 7 participants, 8 teeth missing for xrays from FC group; 7 participants, 7 teeth missing for xrays from FS group

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups4 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups4 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups2 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups

Radiographic evaluation for any periapical or bifurcal lesion, cyst formation or obliteration

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups3 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups1 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Any Root Lesion From Radiography in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups

Any sign of chronic pulpitis, redness or swelling of the gingiva and/or fistula at that time frame and clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 months in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups

Any sign of chronic pulpitis, redness or swelling of the gingiva and/or fistula at that time frame and clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups1 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups

Any sign of chronic pulpitis, redness or swelling of the gingiva and/or fistula at that time frame and clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth exfoliated in FS group so 1 tooth and 1 participant are reduced in FS group

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups

Any sign of chronic pulpitis, redness or swelling of the gingiva and/or fistula at that time frame and clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months

Population: 2 teeth exfoliated from HA group so number of teeth reduced from 50 to 48 but participants are same

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Dental Abscess in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups

Any pain history at that time frame and/or complaint of discomfort and pain clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months in 3 groups

Population: 2 teeth exfoliated in HA group so 50 teeth reduced to 48 but no participant is reduced

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups

Any pain history at that time frame and/or complaint of discomfort and pain clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth exfoliated (one participant) so 1 tooth and 1 participant are reduced from FS group

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups

Any pain history at that time frame and/or complaint of discomfort and pain clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth extracted from HA group

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups

Any pain history at that time frame and/or complaint of discomfort and pain clinically

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups1 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Patient Discomfort and/or Pain in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 Groups

Internal, external, early or physiological root resorption from periapical/panoramic radiographs

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groups

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption1 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption6 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption1 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption43 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption35 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption1 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption4 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption35 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption1 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption1 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption2 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 Groups

Internal, external, early or physiological root resorption from periapical/panoramic radiographs

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 months in 3 groups

Population: 1 tooth extracted in HA group

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption2 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption9 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption6 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption33 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption25 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption3 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption1 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption11 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption26 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption6 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption3 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption4 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 Groups

Internal, external, early or physiological root resorption from periapical/panoramic radiographs

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 months

Population: 1 tooth exfoliated from FS group so 1 tooth and 1 participant reduced in FS group

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption7 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption11 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption5 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption27 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption18 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption5 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption5 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption12 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption18 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption10 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption5 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption5 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 Groups

Internal, external, early or physiological root resorption from periapical/panoramic radiographs

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months

Population: 6 participants, 12 teeth missing for xrays, 2 exfoliations from HA group; 7 participants, 8 teeth missing for xrays from FC group; 7 participants, 7 teeth missing for xrays from FS group

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption12 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption11 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption7 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption5 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption10 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption8 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption6 teeth
FormocresolNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption8 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsNo resorption6 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsInternal resorption5 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsExternal resorption5 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of Teeth With Root Resorption in 3 GroupsPeriapical resorption15 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups

The tooth is missing or ready to exfoliate physiologically and no pathology is examined

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups

The tooth is missing or ready to exfoliate physiologically and no pathology is examined

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 months in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups1 teeth
FormocresolNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups

The tooth is missing or ready to exfoliate physiologically and no pathology is examined

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 months in 3 groups

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
FormocresolNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups1 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Primary

Number of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups

The tooth is missing or ready to exfoliate physiologically and no pathology is examined

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months in 3 groups

Population: 2 exfoliations in HA group are shown here

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups2 teeth
FormocresolNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Ferric SulfateNumber of the Pathological Exfoliation of Affected Teeth in 3 Groups0 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Secondary

Restoration Stability

The survival rate of stainless steel crown and composite applied to each pulpotomized tooth

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 1 month

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown33 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityComposite18 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown28 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityComposite12 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown28 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityComposite11 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Secondary

Restoration Stability

The survival rate of stainless steel crown and composite applied to each pulpotomized tooth

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 3 months

Population: 1 tooth extracted from HA group so reduced to 50 teeth but no participant reduction

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown32 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityComposite18 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown28 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityComposite12 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown28 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityComposite11 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Secondary

Restoration Stability

The survival rate of stainless steel crown and composite applied to each pulpotomized tooth

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 6 months

Population: 1 tooth exfoliated from FS group so 1 tooth and 1 participant reduced from FS group

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown32 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityComposite18 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityComposite12 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown28 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityComposite11 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown27 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared
Secondary

Restoration Stability

The survival rate of stainless steel crown and composite applied to each pulpotomized tooth

Time frame: Change from Baseline at 12 months

Population: 2 teeth exfoliated from HA group so 50 teeth reduced to 48 teeth in HA group

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_UNITS)
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown31 teeth
Hyaluronic AcidRestoration StabilityComposite17 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown28 teeth
FormocresolRestoration StabilityComposite12 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityStainless steel crown27 teeth
Ferric SulfateRestoration StabilityComposite11 teeth
Comparison: Chi-Square Test was used to compare qualitative data.The results were evaluated at the significance level of p\<0,05.p-value: >0.05Chi-squared

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 20, 2026