Cohen Pathways Of Pulp 11th Edition Pdf Free 413 VERIFIED

The clinical and histological examinations confirmed a diagnosis of vital pulp therapy in all teeth at the end of follow-up. All the teeth had a new clinical crown and a normal clinical response. The only clinical complication was the failure of an SSC on tooth No. 15. This failure was caused by a crack in the crown extending from a surface enamel fault into the tooth structure. The tooth was endodontically treated and restored with an SSC. The follow-up clinical examination at three years after the treatment revealed a successful outcome, and the treated tooth was healthy. The possible mechanism for this failure is that the SSC was placed too close to the bottom of the cavity. It is impossible to evaluate the exact cause and to assess the severity of the surface enamel defect. Tooth No. 15 was classified as a failed case according to the modified criteria by Jensen and Jensen [47] and followed as an asymptomatic case. A review of the literature did not reveal an SSC failure in a primary tooth. In addition, tooth No. 15 was not the most carious-exposed tooth among the 22 teeth that were pulpally exposed. Thus, the failure of an SSC in this tooth was not caused by the tooth being the most carious or most exposed. The problem of the close proximity of SSCs to the pulp treatment site is well recognised and frequently encountered. This is a frequent occurrence since the SSC does not follow the original cavity shape and is moulded to the occlusal surface of the tooth. It is possible that the close proximity of the SSC to the pulp treatment site in tooth No. 15 was also a factor in the failure of this restoration. The authors of this paper believe that the majority of the failures were due to the close proximity of the restorations to the pulp treatment site. Thirty-nine teeth (86.6%) had no clinical or radiographic complications. However, in total, two teeth (4.4%) failed. Of these, one was successfully treated and the other was referred for pulp therapy. These failures were not related to the type of restoration material used, the pulp exposure method or the timing of the restoration after the pulp therapy. All teeth showed a normal clinical response and, except one tooth with a failed restoration, all cases were considered healthy and functional at the end of the follow-up. The follow-up period of three years was long enough to evaluate the long-term success of the pulp therapy.

The radicular pulp tissue was not observed to have signs of inflammation during the pulpotomy procedure, and the radicular pulp was clean of visible debris. To prevent infection, the radicular pulp was completely dried during the procedure, and the coronal pulp was kept moist with physiological saline. Root canals were obturated using the warm gutta-percha technique with a single resin point, and the coronal access cavities were sealed with ZOE cement (Alg-A-Temp, Pulpdent Corporation, USA). The teeth were restored with amalgam or a stainless steel crown during the same visit. The coronal restoration was selected by a toss of a coin. In the molars, the crown was placed 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction in all cases. Amalgam was used in four teeth, while crowns were applied in the remaining 12 teeth. The patients were advised to revisit within 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and yearly thereafter for maintenance appointments. 827ec27edc