Table 2.
Pulp Exposure, Pulp Capping, and Tooth Characteristics Used for the Confirmatory Cox Proportional Hazards Model (n = 358)
| All (n=358) % (n) | CaOH (n=175) % (n) | MTA (n=183) % (n) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time to pulp cap | |||
| 0 to < 4.3 min | 50.3% (180) | 56.0% (98) | 44.8% (82) |
| ≥ 4.3 min | 49.7% (178) | 44.0% (77) | 55.2% (101) |
| Amount of bleeding | |||
| Light | 83.8% (300) | 86.3% (151) | 81.4% (149) |
| Moderate to heavy | 16.2% (58) | 13.7% (24) | 18.6% (34) |
| Size of pulp exposure, mm | |||
| ≤ 0.5 | 55.9% (200) | 50.9% (89) | 60.7% (111) |
| 1.0 | 28.8% (103) | 30.9% (54) | 26.8% (49) |
| ≥ 1.5 | 15.4% (55) | 18.3% (32) | 12.6% (23) |
| Location of pulp exposure | |||
| Pulpal floor | 49.2% (176) | 57.1% (100) | 41.5% (76) |
| Axial/proximal wall | 50.8% (182) | 42.9% (75) | 58.5% (107) |
| Rubber dam at time of exposure | |||
| No | 81.0% (290) | 84.6% (148) | 77.6% (142) |
| Yes | 19.0% (68) | 15.4% (27) | 22.4% (41) |
| Type of exposure | |||
| Carious | 88.8% (318) | 91.4% (160) | 86.3% (158) |
| Non-carious | 11.2% (11) | 8.6% (15) | 13.7% (25) |
| Clean exposure with hypochlorite | |||
| No | 12.3% (44) | 17.1% (30) | 7.7% (14) |
| Yes | 87.7% (314) | 82.9% (145) | 92.3% (169) |
| Restoration type at baseline | |||
| Permanent | 90.8% (325) | 85.1% (149) | 96.1% (176) |
| Temporary | 9.2% (33) | 14.9% (26) | 3.8% (7) |
| Tooth mobility | |||
| No | 83.2% (298) | 76.6% (134) | 89.6% (164) |
| Yes | 16.8% (60) | 23.4% (41) | 10.4% (19) |
| Type of existing restoration | |||
| None | 36.9% (132) | 34.3% (60) | 39.3% (72) |
| Amalgam | 35.2% (126) | 34.9% (61) | 35.5% (65) |
| Composite | 21.5% (77) | 24.0% (42) | 19.1% (35) |
| Other | 6.4% (23) | 6.9% (12) | 6.0% (11) |