We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Regenerative Endodontics Versus Apexification in Immature Permanent Teeth with Apical Periodontitis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.
Journal of Endodontics 2017 November
INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to compare the outcomes of regenerative endodontic treatment (RET) and apexification on immature permanent teeth with pulp necrosis and apical periodontitis.
METHODS: A total of 118 patients (118 teeth) were recruited and randomly assigned to either RET or apexification treatment. Each treatment group was divided into 2 subgroups according to the etiology: dens evaginatus or trauma. Clinical symptoms and complications were recorded, and cone-beam computed tomographic imaging with a limited field of view was used to measure the change of root length, root thickness, and apical foramen size at the 12-month follow-up. The t test/rank sum test and Fisher exact test were applied to compare the change of root morphology between RET and apexification.
RESULTS: One hundred three of 118 cases were completed at the 12-month follow-up. The survival rate was 100% for both treatment groups. All cases were asymptomatic with apical healing. The RET group showed a significant increase in root length and root thickness compared with the apexification group (P < .05). In the RET group, the cases caused by dens evaginatus achieved increased root length and root thickness compared with those caused by trauma (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: RET and apexification achieved a comparable outcome in regard to the resolution of symptoms and apical healing. RET showed a better outcome than apexification regarding increased root thickness and root length. The etiology had an impact on the outcome of RET. Dens evaginatus cases showed better prognoses than trauma cases after RET.
METHODS: A total of 118 patients (118 teeth) were recruited and randomly assigned to either RET or apexification treatment. Each treatment group was divided into 2 subgroups according to the etiology: dens evaginatus or trauma. Clinical symptoms and complications were recorded, and cone-beam computed tomographic imaging with a limited field of view was used to measure the change of root length, root thickness, and apical foramen size at the 12-month follow-up. The t test/rank sum test and Fisher exact test were applied to compare the change of root morphology between RET and apexification.
RESULTS: One hundred three of 118 cases were completed at the 12-month follow-up. The survival rate was 100% for both treatment groups. All cases were asymptomatic with apical healing. The RET group showed a significant increase in root length and root thickness compared with the apexification group (P < .05). In the RET group, the cases caused by dens evaginatus achieved increased root length and root thickness compared with those caused by trauma (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: RET and apexification achieved a comparable outcome in regard to the resolution of symptoms and apical healing. RET showed a better outcome than apexification regarding increased root thickness and root length. The etiology had an impact on the outcome of RET. Dens evaginatus cases showed better prognoses than trauma cases after RET.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app