Article Data

  • Views 631
  • Dowloads 129

Reviews

Open Access

Esthetic Restorative Options for Pulpotomized Primary Molars: A Review of Literature

  • Guelmann M1
  • Shapira J1
  • Silva D R1
  • Fuks A B1

DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.36.2.34h304265110137r Vol.36,Issue 2,March 2012 pp.123-126

Published: 01 March 2012

*Corresponding Author(s): Guelmann M E-mail: mguelmann@dental.ufl.edu

Abstract

Objective: The goal of this manuscript was to review the existing literature in regards to esthetic options to restore pulpotomized primary molars. Study design: A pubmed literature search has been performed and all relevant studies were assessed. Results: Two laboratory, 3 restrospective and 4 prospective clinical studies were found, reviewed and analyzed. Conclusions: Based on the limited information available, we concluded that tooth colored and bonded restorations showed promising results as alternative materials to replace stainless steel crowns after pulpotomies in primary molars. Hybrid composites tend to perform better than compomers. Resin modified glass ionomer cements demonstrated excellent marginal seal and retention. More long-term follow up studies are necessary until more definitive recommendations can be made.

Keywords

Tooth colored materials, amalgam, microleakage

Cite and Share

Guelmann M,Shapira J,Silva D R,Fuks A B. Esthetic Restorative Options for Pulpotomized Primary Molars: A Review of Literature. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2012. 36(2);123-126.

References

1. Guidelines  on  pulp  therapy  for  primary  and  immature  permanent teeth.American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry Reference Manual, 32: 194–201, 2010.

2. Fuks AB. Current concepts in vital primary pulp therapy. Eur J Paedi-atr Dent, 3: 115–120, 2002.

3. Fuks  AB.  Pulp  therapy  for  the  primary  dentition.  In:  Pinkham  JR, Casamassimo PS, Fields HW Jr, McTigue DJ, Nowak A, eds. Pediatric Dentistry: Infancy Through Adolescence. 4th ed. St. Louis, Mo: Else-vier Saunders Co;  375–393, 2005.

4. Randall RC, Vrijhoef MM, Wilson NH. Efficacy of preformed metal crowns  vs.  amalgam  restorations  of  primary  molars:  a  systematic review. J Am Dent Assoc, 131: 337–343, 2000.

5. Seale NS. The use of stainless steel crowns. Pediatr Dent, 24: 501–505, 2002.

6. Zimmerman JA, Feigal RJ, Till MJ, Hodges JS. Parental attitudes on restorative materials as factors influencing current use in pediatric den-tistry. Pediatr Dent, 31: 63–70, 2009.

7. Peretz B, Ram D. Restorative material for children’s teeth: preferences of parents and children. J Dent Child, 69: 243–248, 2002.

8. Fishman R, Guelmann M, Bimstein E. Children’s selection of posterior restorative materials. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 31: 1–4, 2006.

9. Kupietzky A,  Waggoner  WE,  Galea  J.  Long  term  photographic  and radiographic  assessment  of  bonded  resin  composite  strip  crowns  for primary incisors: results after 3 years. Pediatr Dent, 27: 221–225, 2005.

10. Ram  D,  Fuks  AB.  Clinical  performance  of  resin-bonded  composite strip crowns in primary incisors: a retrospective study. Int J Paediatr Dent, 16: 49–54, 2006.

11. Ram  D,  Fuks  AB,  Eidelman  E.  Long  term  clinical  performance  of esthetic primary molar crowns. Pediatr Dent, 21: 445–448, 1999.

12. Guelmann M, Mjör IA. Materials and techniques for restorations of pri-mary  molars  by  pediatric  dentists  in  Florida.  Pediatr  Dent,  24: 326–331, 2002.

13. Berg JH. The continuum of restorative materials in pediatric dentistry-a review for the clinician. Pediatr Dent, 20: 93–100, 1998.

14. Guelmann  M,  Mjör  IA,  Jerrell  GR.  The  teaching  of  Class  I  and  II restorations  in  primary  molars:  a  survey  of  North  American  Dental Schools. Pediatr Dent, 23: 410–414, 2001.

15. Motisuki C, Lima LM, dos Santos-Pinto L, Guelmann M. Restorative treatment on Class I and II restorations: a survey of Brazilian Dental Schools. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 30: 175–178, 2005.

16. Buerkle V, Kuehnisch J, Guelmann M, Hickel R. Restoration materials for  primary  molars-results  from  a  European  survey.  J  Dent,  33: 275–281, 2005.

17. Holan G, Fuks AB, Ketlz N. Success rate of formocresol pulpotomy in primary molars restored with stainless steel crown vs amalgam. Pediatr Dent, 24: 212–216, 2002.

18. Guelmann M, McIlwain MF, Primosch RE. Radiographic assessment of  primary  molar  pulpotomies  restored  with  resin-based  materials. Pediatr Dent, 27: 24–27, 2005.

19. Berg  JH,  Donly  KJ.  Conservative  technique  for  restoring  primary molars after pulpotomy treatment. J Dent Child, 55: 463–464, 1988.

20. el-Kalla IH, García-Godoy F. Fracture strength of adhesively restored pulpotomized primary molars. J Dent Child, 66: 238–242, 1999.

21. Guelmann M, Bookmyer KL, Villalta P, García-Godoy F. Microleakage of  restorative  techniques  for  pulpotomized  primary  molars.  J  Dent Child, 71: 209–211, 2004.

22. Caceda  JH.  The  use  of  resin-based  composite  restorations  in  pulpo-tomized primary molars. J Dent Child, 74: 147–50, 2007.

23. Cehreli ZC, Cetinguc A, Cengiz SB, Altay AN. Clinical performance of pulpotomized primary molars restored with resin-based materials. 24-month results. Am J Dent, 19: 262–266, 2006.

24. Atieh M. Stainless steel crown versus modified open-sandwich restora-tions for primary molars: a 2-year randomized clinical trial. Int J Pae-diatr Dent, 18: 325–332, 2008.

25. Sakai VT, Moretti AB, Oliveira TM, Fornetti AP, Santos CF, Machado MA, Abdo RC. Pulpotomy of human primary molars with MTA and Portland  cement:  a  randomized  controlled  trial.  Br  Dent  J,  207: 128–129, 2009.

26. Zulfikaroglu BT, Atac AS, Cehreli ZC. Clinical performance of Class II  adhesive  restorations  in  pulpectomized  primary  molars:  12-month results. J Dent Child, 75: 33–43, 2008.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

PubMed (MEDLINE) PubMed comprises more than 35 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top