Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

A critical look at glutaraldehyde.

R J Feigal1, H H Messer

  • 1Division of Pediatric Dentistry, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry, Minneapolis.

Pediatric Dentistry
|April 1, 1990
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Risk score algorithm for treatment of persistent apical periodontitis.

Journal of dental research·2014
Same author

Fracture strength and fracture patterns of root-filled teeth restored with direct resin composite restorations under static and fatigue loading.

Operative dentistry·2013
Same author

Terminology of endodontic outcomes.

International endodontic journal·2013
Same author

Enhancing the bond of a resin-based sealer to root dentine.

International endodontic journal·2012
Same author

Assessment of laminate technique using glass ionomer and resin composite for restoration of root filled teeth.

Journal of dentistry·2012
Same author

Survival of rat functional dental pulp cells in vascularized tissue engineering chambers.

Tissue & cell·2012

Glutaraldehyde is proposed as an alternative to formocresol for primary tooth pulpotomy. However, this review found little difference in toxicity, mutagenicity, or systemic distribution, questioning glutaraldehyde

Area of Science:

  • Pediatric Dentistry
  • Dental Materials Science
  • Toxicology

Background:

  • Formocresol has been a standard medicament for pulpotomy in primary teeth.
  • Glutaraldehyde has been suggested as a potentially safer alternative to formocresol.
  • Limited comparative data exists on the toxicological profiles of glutaraldehyde and formocresol in this context.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically compare glutaraldehyde and formocresol regarding toxicity, mutagenicity, and systemic distribution.
  • To review existing literature on the safety and efficacy of these two pulpotomy agents.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic literature review of studies on glutaraldehyde and formocresol.
  • Analysis of data concerning systemic distribution from pulpotomy sites.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo cytotoxicity and mutagenicity data for both agents.

    • Main Results:

    • Comparative analysis revealed minimal differences between glutaraldehyde and formocresol in terms of systemic distribution from pulpotomy sites.
    • Cytotoxicity and mutagenicity profiles showed comparable concerns for both medicaments.
    • No significant advantage of glutaraldehyde over formocresol was identified based on the reviewed parameters.

    Conclusions:

    • The reviewed data does not strongly support glutaraldehyde as a safer alternative to formocresol for primary tooth pulpotomy.
    • Further research may be needed to definitively establish the comparative safety profiles.
    • The rationale for substituting formocresol with glutaraldehyde warrants critical re-evaluation.