The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the efficacy of lesion sterilization and tissue repair (LSTR) antibiotic paste versus zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) pulpectomy for the treatment of primary molars with pulp necrosis in pediatric patients. The main questions it aims to answer are: * Is LSTR antibiotic paste (CTZ paste) effective in treating primary molars with pulp necrosis? * Is ZOE pulpectomy effective in treating primary molars with pulp necrosis, and how does its efficacy compare with LSTR therapy? Researchers will compare LSTR therapy (Group A) with ZOE pulpectomy (Group B) to determine which treatment provides better clinical and radiographic outcomes after six months. Participants will: * Be randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups after diagnosis of pulp necrosis in primary molars. * Receive treatment under standard behavior management techniques with local anesthesia following topical application of 2% lignocaine gel and rubber dam isolation. * Undergo either Lesion Sterilization and Tissue Repair (LSTR) therapy with CTZ paste or zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) pulpectomy according to group allocation. * Return for a clinical and radiographic follow-up evaluation after six months to assess treatment outcomes. * Allow researchers to record their clinical findings and radiographic results to evaluate the efficacy of both treatment methods.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
180
Placement of CTZ antibiotic paste (chloramphenicol, tetracycline, zinc oxide mixed with eugenol) in the pulp chamber after irrigation with 3% sodium hypochlorite, followed by restoration with resin-modified glass ionomer cement.
Intervention: Conventional pulpectomy including working length determination, canal debridement with K-files and 3% sodium hypochlorite irrigation, followed by obturation with zinc oxide eugenol paste and final restoration with resin-modified glass ionomer cement.
Number of Participants with Clinical Success
Clinical success will be assessed based on the absence of sinus tract, soft tissue swelling, or edema associated with the treated primary molar during follow-up clinical examination.
Time frame: 6 months
Number of Participants with Radiographic Success
Radiographic success will be assessed by reduction or complete disappearance of the initial periapical radiolucency and absence of any newly developed radiolucency on follow-up periapical radiographs of the treated tooth.
Time frame: 6 months after treatment
Reduction in Periapical Radiolucency
Change in the size of periapical radiolucency from baseline to follow-up radiographs in treated primary molars.
Time frame: baseline and 6 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.