Title
Heat testing methodology comparison.
Abstract
Pre-operative pulpal and periapical diagnosis is critical for effective and appropriate
endodontic treatment. Occasionally patients present with a chief complaint involving
hypersensitivity to heat – a hallmark sign of irreversible pulpitis. In an attempt to
replicate this chief complaint, a variety of clinical methods have been developed to
deliver a heat stimulus to a tooth. Friction from a burlew wheel, heated gutta-percha,
a heated instrument, and hot water have all been used to warm teeth. Recently, an
instrument has been developed which is heated electronically and placed directly
against a tooth. The aim of this study was to determine which of these methods
produces the most consistent temperature rise within the pulp of a tooth. The value of
this consistency is that it allows clinical differentiation between a normal pulp and a
pulp demonstrating irreversible pulpitis. The present study used extracted maxillary
teeth with thermocouples mounted within the pulp chamber. Four operators applied
the following methods to the teeth: heated gutta-percha, heated ball burnisher, hot
water, and an electronic probe attached first to a System B™ and then to an
Elements™ unit. Each test was performed for 60 seconds, and the temperature
recorded every half-second. Analysis of the data revealed the most consistent
warming of the pulp was accomplished with the electronic probe attached to the
Elements™ unit. The lowest level of consistency was found with hot water. The
electronic probe also yielded temperature changes which were more consistent
between operators compared to the other three methods.
Description
University of Minnesota M.S. thesis. August 2010. Major: Dentistry. Advisor: Dr. Baisden. 1 computer file (PDF); vi, 35 pages.
Suggested Citation
Bierma, Mark M..
(2010).
Heat testing methodology comparison..
Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy,
https://hdl.handle.net/11299/96879.