Cost Estimates for Bioactive Cement Pulpotomies and Crowns in Primary Molars.

Pediatr Dent

Professor and chair, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, in the College of Dentistry, University of Florida;, Email:

Published: January 2018

Purpose: To explore cost-effective options for pulpotomy, chamber fillings, and crowns in primary molars using bioactive cements.

Methods: Thirty extracted primary molars were divided into five groups, each having two sets of three teeth (one first molar and two second molars). Pulpotomy and restorative options were randomly assigned: Biodentine plus Ketac Molar; NuSmile NeoMTA plus Tempit LC; NeoMTA Plus plus Fuji IX; MTA Angelus plus IRM capsule; MTA Flow plus IRM powder and liquid. After mixing one dose, pulp chambers of the first molar and one second molar were filled with a two-millimeter layer of bioactive cement and filling material (protocol A). The other second molar's chamber was solo filled by a single mixed dose of bioactive cement (protocol B). The cost for each material was calculated independently, regardless of the group to which they belonged. A market assessment for primary molar crowns was performed, and a comparison table was produced.

Results: For protocol A, the lowest mean cost per tooth (LMC) was obtained for NeoMTA cements and IRM powder and liquid; for solo bioactive cement pulp chamber filling, protocol (B), LMC was obtained for NeoMTA cements. Zirconia crowns were the costliest.

Conclusions: NeoMTA-type cements were the most cost-effective option for single-tooth pulpotomy. Zirconia crowns had the highest cost per tooth.

Download full-text PDF

Source

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bioactive cement
16
primary molars
12
crowns primary
8
molar second
8
irm powder
8
powder liquid
8
cost tooth
8
lmc neomta
8
neomta cements
8
zirconia crowns
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!