Zincoxide-propolis vs Zincoxide-eugenol Pulpectomy

Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Zinc Oxide-Propolis Versus Zinc Oxide- Eugenol as Obturating Material in Primary Teeth Pulpectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Status

UNKNOWN

Phases

Early Phase 1

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT05230797

Enrollment

Registered

2022-02-09

Start date

2022-04-30

Completion date

2022-09-30

Last updated

2022-02-09

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

Conditions

Pulp Necroses

Brief summary

The clinical trial aims to evaluate the clinical and radiographic success of Zinc oxide- propolis versus Zinc oxide -Eugenol as obturating material in pulpectomy of non-vital primary teeth.

Detailed description

Pulpectomy is considered the most convenient way to treat the non-vital primary teeth as it preserves the affected tooth to maintain the length and integrity of the dental arch until exfoliation4. Zinc oxide-eugenol cement (ZOE) has been used as a root canal filling material for primary teeth and has long been the material of choice of pediatric dentists worldwide, although it fails to meet the ideal requirements of root canal filling material for primary teeth due to limited antimicrobial action, and a slower rate of resorption than the roots of the primary teeth. Concerns about these drawbacks of ZOE directed to search for alternative obturating materials for primary teeth. Propolis, a natural resinous substance, is collected by honey bees with potent antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory properties. The main chemical constituents present in propolis are flavonoids, phenolics, and other aromatic compounds. Considering these beneficial effects of propolis, a zinc oxide-propolis mixture is suggested to increase the survival rate and improve the treatment prognosis of non-vital primary teeth.

Interventions

DRUGZinc oxide Propolis

antibacterial and anti-inflammatory

DRUGZinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement

Antimicrobial and antiseptic

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

4 Years to 6 Years

Healthy volunteers

Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Children 4-6 years * Non-vital primary molars * Teeth with radiographic evidence of minimum bone loss.

Exclusion criteria

* Primary molars with less than two-thirds of the remaining root length * Molars demonstrating extensive external or internal resorption, * Teeth exhibiting greater than Grade I mobility * Non-restorable with stainless steel * Children whose parents or caregivers did not give consent for the study

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Absence of Pain	9 months	•Measuring Method : Verbal Question to Patient /Parents •Measuring Unite: Binary

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026