Ounsi et al
may be performed using gutta percha (Figure 5).
Postoperatory considerations Follow-up is indicated with criteria for clinical success being no mobility, pain, fistula or abscess; and criteria for radiologic success being no pathological resorption and no radiolucencies. Conclusion The success of the endodontic treatment on deciduous teeth cannot be conceived without knowledge and understanding of pulp morphology, root genesis and resorptive processes related to deciduous teeth. One must bear in mind that the abovementioned treatments are not absolute. The approach regarding endodontic treatments on deciduous teeth developed from clinical and histological studies. Research breakthroughs in these fields are very likely to yield modifications in these treatments that would possibly improve the prognosis of our treatments. Meanwhile, keeping to rational fundamentals in case selection and operative techniques, pediatric endodontics remains a major benefit to the child’s health and wellbeing.
Reprinted with permission from Dental Horizons Ounsi H , Debaybo D, Salameh Z, Chebaro A, Bassam H. Endodontic considerations in pediatric dentistry: a clinical perspective. Dent Hor 2009;1:5-10.
1 Finn SB. Morphology of the primary teeth. In : Finn SB et al. Clinical pedodontics. 3rd ed., WB Saunders Co., Philadelphia, 1967.
2 Wheeler RC. A textbook of dental anatomy and physiology. 4th ed., WB Saunders Co., Philadelphia, 1965.
3 Baume LJ. The biology of pulp and dentin. In: Myers HM, ed. Monographs in Oral Science. Basel, Switzerland: Karger, 1980:67-182.
4 Fuks AB. Current concepts in vital primary pulp therapy. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2002;3:115-20.
5 Fuks AB. Pulp therapy for the primary dentition. In: Pediatric Dentistry: infancy through adolescence. St Louis, MO: Elsevier, 2005:118-30.
6 Guidelines for pulp therapy for primary and young permanent teeth: American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, Reference manual. Pediatr Dent 1996; 18: 44.
7 Camps JH. Paediatric endodontic treatment. In: Cohen S, Burns RC. Pathways of the pulp. 7th ed., St Louis, MO: Mosby Inc,1998.
8 Cvek M, Cleaton-Jones PE, Austin JC, Andreasen JO. Pulp reactions to exposure after experimental crown fracture or grinding in adult monkeys. J Endodon1982; 8:
INTERNATIONAL DENTISTRY SA VOL. 11, NO. 2
9 Heide S, Kerekes K. Delayed partial pulpotomie in permanent incisors in monkeys. Int Endod J 1986; 19: 78-79.
10 Heide S. Pulp reactions to exposure for 4, 24, and 168 hours. J Dent Res 1980; 59: 1910-1913.
11 Rolling I, Thylstrup A. A 3-year follow-up study of pulpotomized primary molars treated with the formocresol technique. Scand J Dent Res 1975;83:47-53.
12 Myers Dr et al. Distribution of 14C-formaldehyde after pulpotomy with formocresol. J Am Dent Assoc 1978; 96: 805-.
13 Myers Dr et al. Acute toxicity of systemically administered formocresol in dogs. Pediatr Dent 1981; 3: 37-.
14 Block RM, Lewis RD, Sheats JB, Fawley J. Cell-mediated immune response to dog pulp tissue altered by formocresol within the root canal. J Endodon 1977; 3: 424-430.
15 Friedberg BH, Gatner LP. Embryotoxicity and teratogenicity of formocresol on developing chick embryos. J Endodon 1990; 16: 434-437.
16 Tagger M, Tagger E, Sarnat H. Pulpal reaction for glutaraldehyde and paraformaldehyde pulpotomy dressings in monkey primary teeth. Endodon Dent Traumatol 1986; 2: 237-242.
17 Mack RB, Dean JA. Electrosurgical pulpotomie: a retrospective human study. ASDC J Dent Child 1993; 60: 107-114.
18 Shoji S, Nakamura M, Horiuchi H. Histopathological changes in dental pulps irradiated by CO2 laser: a preliminary report on laser pulpotomy. J Endodon 1985; 11: 379-384.
19 Burnett S, Walker J. Comparison of ferric sulfate, formocresol, and a combination of ferric sulfate/formocresol in primary tooth vital pulpotomies: a retrospective radiographic survey. J Dent Child 2002; 69: 44-48.
20 Fuks A. Pulp therapy of the primaty and young dentitions. Dent Clin North Am 2000; 44: 571-595.
21 Fadawi S, Anderson A. A comparison of the pulpal response to freeze-dried bone, calcium hydroxide, and zinc oxide in primary teeth in 2 cynomologous monkeys. Pediatr Dent 1996; 18: 52-56.
22 Ranly D. Pulpotomy therapy in primary teeth: new modalities for old rationales. Pediatr Dent 1994; 16: 403-409.
23 Eidelman E, Molan G, Fuks A. MTA versus formocrésol in pulpotomized primary molars: a preliminary report. Pediatr Dent 2001; 23: 15-18.
24 Hill SD, Berry CW, Seale NS, Kaga M. Comparison of antimicrobial and cytotoxic effects of glutaraldehyde and formocresol. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991; 71: 89-95.
25 Ranley DM, Horn D. Distribution, metabolism, and excretion od 14C-glutaraldehyde. J Endodon 1990; 16: