Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38646305›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Comparative Evaluation of a New Tricalcium Silicate Cement With Calcium Hydroxide as Direct Pulp Capping Agents: A Clinical Study.

Dhanya Shaji, Sobha Krishnamma, Divia Attuvalappil Rajan, Subija Kunnumpurath Narayanankutty, Jinu George, Christalin Ramakrishnan

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 42% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dhanya ShajiDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Thrissur, IND.
Sobha KrishnammaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Kottayam, IND.
Divia Attuvalappil RajanDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Thrissur, IND.
Subija Kunnumpurath NarayanankuttyDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Thrissur, IND.
Jinu GeorgeDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Thrissur, IND.
Christalin RamakrishnanDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Thrissur, IND.
Government Dental College and Hospital · INGovernment Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objectives Direct pulp capping (dPC) is a therapeutic process that involves the application of a protective chemical to an exposed pulp with the intent to facilitate the restoration and preservation of its vitality and function. Despite numerous proposed solutions, researchers have yet to find a dependable, non-absorbable bioactive pulp capping substance that constantly activates cellular healing processes, consequently preserving pulpal vitality over an extended period of time. The objective of this study was to assess and contrast the efficacy of a novel tricalcium silicate cement and calcium hydroxide in preserving the long-term health of the dental pulp following dPC using clinical and radiographic observations. Materials and methods A total of 60 individuals with symptoms of reversible pulpitis associated with deep carious lesions were chosen for dPC in the study. Two groups comprising 30 patients each underwent dPC using the novel tricalcium silicate cement (experimental group) and calcium hydroxide (control group) out of the total number of patients. A thin protective covering of self-curing glass ionomer base was applied on top of the capping material. The dentist provided instant permanent restoration employing direct posterior composite resin. Follow-up examinations were conducted three, six, nine, and 12 months after the procedure, during which assessments were performed using clinical and radiographic parameters. Results The minimum age of the study group was 16, and its maximum age was 34 (22.35 ± 2.3 years). The control group consisted of 12 males and 18 females, while the Biodentine group consisted of 13 males and 17 females. The age and gender distribution were determined to have insignificant statistical differences across the groups. The pain score exhibited statistical significance at both the three-month and six-month follow-up visits (p < 0.05). The pain score at the 12-month follow-up was 0.38 ± 0.52 in the case group and 0.42 ± 0.61 in the control group (p = 0.79). The average Periapical Index (PAI) score for the Dycal and Biodentin groups after the 12-month follow-up was 1.38 ± 0.97 and 1 ± 0.3, respectively. This difference was found to be statistically significant (p = 0.044). In addition, there was a statistically significant difference in the PAI score at the three-month, six-month, and nine-month follow-ups (p < 0.01). During the entirety of the follow-up duration, one individual in the Biodentine group had tenderness upon percussion, a negative reaction for pulp vitality, pulpal changes, and a widening of the periodontal space. Statistically significant differences were observed in pulpal changes and tenderness on percussion during the nine-month and 12-month follow-up periods (p < 0.05). After 12 months, the rate of success in the group treated with Dycal was 91.3%, while the success percentage in the group treated with Biodentine was 98.55%. This difference in outcomes was determined to be statistically significant (λ

Indexed as

biodentinecalcium hydroxidedirect pulp cappingdycalnew tricalcium silicate cement

Identifiers

PMID38646305
PMCPMC11026997
OpenAlexW4393019577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.