A Phase 1/2 interventional study of Group A - LSTR Therapy (CTZ Paste) and Group B - ZOE Pulpectomy in Pulp Necrosis, sponsored by University of Faisalabad. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 4 Years to 10 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-03-19.
Sponsored by University of Faisalabad · Phase 1/2, Interventional, and Treatment
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:
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:
149 studies on the registry are indexed under Dental Pulp Necrosis; 39 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 180 is above the median of 44 across 139 interventional studies indexed under Dental Pulp Necrosis.
Browse Dental Pulp Necrosis studies →University of Faisalabad is the lead sponsor of 83 studies on the registry; 26 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Children of both genders
Exclusion Criteria:
Children who have a physical or mental change.
Participants in this group receive CTZ antibiotic paste placed in the pulp chamber after irrigation.
Drug: Group A - LSTR Therapy (CTZ Paste)
Participants in this group receive conventional pulpectomy with ZOE paste placed in the root canals.
Procedure: Group B - ZOE Pulpectomy
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
No study locations are listed for this record.
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Mar 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Faisalabad