Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 21, 2025
Accessing the Cytotoxicity and Cell Response to Biomaterials
Published on: July 8, 2021
Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy:
Nancy Goel1, Arun Kumar1, Ruchi Singhal1
1Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Introduction:
The study was performed to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of chlorhexidine (CHX) polymer scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and formocresol for vital primary pulp therapy-a randomized clinical study.
Materials And Methods:
A total of 120 primary molars were included from children aged between 6 and 8 years in this randomized clinical study based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and were randomly allocated into three groups (group I-CHX polymer scaffold, group II-3Mixtatin, and group III-formocresol. Pulpotomy was performed in a vital cariously exposed primary tooth with healthy periodontium where their retention is more beneficial than extraction. Subjects were followed up at 1, 3, and 6 months for clinical and radiographic evaluations.
Results:
At 6 months of follow-up, the overall success rate of pulpotomy in groups I, II, and III was 56.41, 71.05, and 60.52% in each group, respectively. Nonsignificant difference (p > 0.05) was seen during intergroup comparison.
Conclusion:
However, among the three materials used in this study, 3mixtatin comparatively had better results.
How To Cite This Article:
Goel N. Comparative Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Polymer Scaffold, 3Mixtatin, and Formocresol for Vital Primary Pulp Therapy: A Randomized 6-month Clinical Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(3):478-482.
