Influence of selective immunosuppressive drug regimens on the healing of exposed dogs' dental pulp capped with a recent calcium silicate-based cement

Objectives In the clinical medicine, immunosuppressive drugs are used for an assortment of disorders, while their effect on the pulp healing is a controversial issue. This study evaluated the effect of different immunosuppressive drugs on the healing capacity of mechanically exposed dogs' dental pulps after direct pulp capping (DPC) with calcium silicate-based cement. Materials and methods Twelve healthy male dogs were randomly allocated into four equal groups, 3 dogs each: group I allocated as a control group where no drugs were received; group n given prednisone (Pred); group III given a combination of Pred and cyclosporine A (CsA); and group IV given triple dose including Pred, CsA, and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) for 45 days before the operative procedures and until the dogs were euthanized. In each dog, 16 class V cavities were prepared on the labial surfaces of anterior teeth. Following mechanical exposure, the pulps were capped with Biodentine, calcium silicate-based cement. The pulpal tissues response to Biodentine was assessed 65 days postoperatively. Results The pulp healing response was inferior in the Pred-CsA- and Pred-CsA-MMF-treated groups compared with the control and Pred-treated groups (P < 0.05). Non-significant difference was found between control and Pred-treated groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions Within the limitation of this study, DPC with calcium silicate-based cement performed under strict aseptic condition for traumatically exposed dental pulp can be considered as a successful treatment option for those who receiving Pred immunosuppressive therapy. Meanwhile, DPC with those receiving a combination of Pred, CsA, and/or MMF immunosuppressive drug regimens demonstrated unfavorable results.

Automated summary

The study found that a combination of the immunosuppressive drugs Pred, CsA, and MMF had a negative impact on pulp healing, while treatment with Pred alone showed no significant difference compared to the control group.