Question · asked by 1 review
Potassium nitrate/dimethyl isosorbide/polycarboxylate cement (KNO3/DMI/PCa) vs Polycarboxylate cement (PCa) alone: Clinical success (absence of periapical pathology, tenderness to pressure and fistula formation) at 24 months
- Population
- Adults with asymptomatic teeth with vital carious pulp exposures
- Intervention
- Potassium nitrate/dimethyl isosorbide/polycarboxylate cement (KNO3/DMI/PCa)
- Comparison
- Polycarboxylate cement (PCa) alone
- Outcome
- Clinical success (absence of periapical pathology, tenderness to pressure and fistula formation) at 24 months
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Potassium nitrate/dimethyl isosorbide/polycarboxylate cement (KNO3/DMI/PCa) vs Polycarboxylate cement (PCa) alone Clinical success (absence of periapical pathology, tenderness to pressure and fistula formation) at 24 months · Adults with asymptomatic vital pulpal exposures from caries · 24 months Pulp management for caries in adults: maintaining pulp vitality (2007) · Cochrane All outcomes | Hodosh 2003 (Analysis 3.1): all 18 patients receiving KNO3/DMI/PCa responded favourably (0/18 developed clinical symptoms) versus 10/12 in the PCa group. "The results in groups two and three were statistically… | 1 study · 30 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pulp management for caries in adults: maintaining pulp vitality 2007 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2006-03 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Potassium nitrate/dimethyl isosorbide/polycarboxylate cement (KNO3/DMI/PCa) vs Potassium nitrate/polycarboxylate cement (KNO3/PCa) · Adults with asymptomatic teeth with vital carious pulp exposures · 1 review
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.