Skip to content

Comparison between different methods of root canal treatment in children.

Pulpectomy versus non-instrumental endodontic treatment in deciduous teeth: randomized controlled clinical trial.

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
REBEC
Registry ID
RBR-58m7f6
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2020-04-06
Start date
2020-03-21
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-10-27

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

Conditions

Pulpitis, dental pulp necrosis

Interventions

Conventional pulpectomy with calcium hydroxide paste versus pulpotomy with application of antibiotic paste, each group with 259 teeth. Follow-up will be carried out through clinical and radiographic e
Procedure/surgery

Sponsors

Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
Lead Sponsor
Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
Collaborator

Eligibility

Age
No minimum to 12 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Posterior teeth with deep caries lesions and associated interradicular and / or periapical radiolucency; teeth affected by caries with abnormal mobility due to periapical pathology, but not associated with physiological exfoliation; history of spontaneous pain; teeth presenting intraoral swelling or drainage of the sinus tract; continuous bleeding after amputation of the coronal pulp tissue; and teeth with external physiological or pathological resorption involving less than a third of the root length.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Systemic pathology (clinically compromising conditions and special health care needs); history of allergic reaction to local anesthetics or to the components of the test materials; antibiotic therapy in the 30 days prior to the intervention or during treatment; teeth unable to receive absolute isolation and / or unable to be restored; tooth that has previously undergone root canal manipulation; tooth with interradicular or periapical radiolucency involving more than half of the smallest vertically measured root; tooth with internal root resorption; tooth with physiological or pathological external root resorption of more than one third of its length; root canal obliteration; or inadequate bone support evidenced by non-physiological tooth mobility compared to the contralateral tooth.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Similar clinical and radiographic success rates for both methods employed, verified through clinical and radiographic examinations performed every 6 months, to be submitted to statistical analysis.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Secondary outcomes are not expected.

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Public ContactMariana Sancas

Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro

sancasm@ufrj.br+55 21 3938-2098

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP)