Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH): Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success)
- Population
- Vital permanent teeth (mature or immature) with deep or extremely deep caries and asymptomatic pulp or reversible pulpitis, undergoing direct pulp capping
- Intervention
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)
- Comparison
- Calcium hydroxide (CH)
- Outcome
- Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success)
Mineral trioxide aggregate shows higher odds of clinical and radiographic success than calcium hydroxide (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.70 to 5.45; ungraded subgroup analysis).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CaOH) Clinical and radiographic success · Vital permanent teeth (mature or immature) with deep or extremely deep caries and asymptomatic pulp or reversible… · >=12 months, Primary or secondary dental care Mineral trioxide aggregate shows higher odds of clinical and radiographic success than calcium hydroxide (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.70 to 5.45; ungraded subgroup analysis). Effectiveness of calcium hydroxide compared to hydraulic calcium silicate cements for direct pulp capping in… (2025) All outcomes | OR 3.05 [1.70, 5.45] | 4 studies · 311 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness of calcium hydroxide compared to hydraulic calcium silicate cements for direct pulp capping in managing deep caries in vital… 2025 All outcomes | 2025-02-19 | 9 | High / Moderate |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) · Permanent teeth with carious pulp exposure · 2 reviews
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Biodentine · Permanent teeth with carious pulp exposure · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) · Patients with carious pulp exposure in permanent teeth undergoing pulpotomy · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) · Permanent teeth with carious pulp exposure · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) · Patients with carious pulp exposure in immature permanent teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs TotalFill BC · Permanent teeth with carious pulp exposure · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) · Patients with carious pulp exposure in permanent teeth with mixed root development · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) · Permanent teeth with carious pulp exposure · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) · Patients with carious pulp exposure in permanent teeth undergoing direct pulp capping · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) · Patients with carious pulp exposure in mature permanent teeth · 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.