Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Pediatr Dent. 2012 Sep-Oct;34(5):120–128.

Table 7.

INFLUENCE OF ARCH TYPE, MOLAR TYPE, GENDER, AND LOCALE OF TREATMENT ON OUTCOMES OBSERVED AT COMBINED 6 TO 24 MONTHS

Arch type Material Outcome
Total
n (%)
Success
n (%)
Failure
n (%)
Maxilla DFC 103 (82) 22 (18) 125 (48)
MTA 131 (98) 3 (2) 134 (52)
Mandible DFC 178 (80) 45 (20) 223 (51)
MTA 196 (92) 16 (8) 212 (49)

Maxilla DFC vs GMTA: FET <0.01
Mandible DFC vs GMTA: FET <0.01
DFC maxilla vs mandible: chi-square (1 df)=0.66, FET=0.67
GMTA maxilla vs mandible: FET=0.05

First DFC 152 (84) 28 (16) 180 (56)
MTA 136 (96) 6 (4) 142 (44)
Second DFC 129 (77) 39 (23) 168 (45)
MTA 191 (94) 13 (6) 204 (55)

First molar DFC vs GMTA: chi-square (1 df) <0.01, FET <0.01
Second molar DFC vs GMTA: chi-square (1 df) <0.01, FET <0.01
DFC first vs second: chi-square (1 df)=0.09, FET=0.08
GMTA first vs second: chi-square (1 df)=0.53, FET=0.48

Female DFC 132 (80) 32 (20) 164 (48)
GMTA 170 (97) 6 (3) 176 (52)
Male DFC 149 (81) 35 (19) 184 (52)
GMTA 157 (92) 13 (8) 170 (48)

Female DFC vs GMTA: chi-square (1 df) <0.01, FET <0.01
Male DFC vs GMTA: chi-square (1 df) <0.01, FET <0.01
DFC female vs male: chi-square (1 df)=0.91, FET=0.1
GMTA female vs male: chi-square (1 df)=0.14, FET=0.10

Clinic DFC 230 (84) 45 (16) 275 (49)
MTA 271 (95) 14 (5) 285 (51)
Operating room DFC 51 (70) 22 (30) 73 (54)
MTA 56 (92) 5 (8) 61 (46)

Clinic DFC vs GMTA: chi-square (1 df) <0.01, FET <0.01
Operating room DFC vs GMTA: chi-square (1 df) <0.01, FET <0.01
DFC clinic vs operating room: chi-square (1 df) <0.01, FET <0.01
GMTA clinic vs operating room: chi-square (1 df) <0.48, FET <0.35
*

Chi-square=Pearson, 2-tailed; 1 df=1 degree of freedom; FET=Fisher’s exact test, 2-tailed; DFC=diluted formocresol; GMTA=gray mineral trioxide aggregate.

Statistically significant at the P<.05 level.