Question · asked by 1 review

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE): Failure of therapy

Population
Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally considered to need a restoration
Intervention
Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR)
Comparison
Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)
Outcome
Failure of therapy

It is very uncertain whether non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) changes failure of therapy compared with selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) (very low certainty).

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 100%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)
Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious… · 12 months, Cavitated but not deep lesions, primary dentition
It is very uncertain whether non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) changes failure of therapy compared with selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) (very low certainty).
Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes
OR 0.62 [0.21, 1.88]2 studies · 204 participantsVery low
Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)
Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious… · 12-18 months, Deep lesions, permanent dentition
It is very uncertain whether non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) changes failure of therapy compared with selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) (very low certainty).
Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes
OR 11.32 [1.97, 65.02]2 studies · 179 participantsVery low
Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)
Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious… · 6-36 months, Deep lesions, primary dentition
It is very uncertain whether non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) changes failure of therapy compared with selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) (very low certainty).
Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes
OR 4.43 [1.04, 18.77]4 studies · 265 participantsVery low

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions
2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
2020-07Not listedNot assessed

The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.