Question · asked by 1 review
Partial pulpotomy vs Full (complete) pulpotomy: Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success)
- Population
- Mature permanent (molar) teeth with deep caries and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis (spontaneous pain)
- Intervention
- Partial pulpotomy
- Comparison
- Full (complete) pulpotomy
- Outcome
- Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success)
Within two high-quality RCTs, partial and full pulpotomy achieved similar 1-year clinical/radiographic success for irreversible pulpitis (pooled 83% vs 90%), with no significant difference (high certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Partial pulpotomy vs Full (complete) pulpotomy Clinical and radiographic success (composite) · Mature permanent (molar) teeth with deep caries and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis (spontaneous pain) · 1 year (12 months), University dental clinics, India (single-centre) Within two high-quality RCTs, partial and full pulpotomy achieved similar 1-year clinical/radiographic success for irreversible pulpitis (pooled 83% vs 90%), with no significant difference (high certainty). The effectiveness of partial pulpotomy compared with full pulpotomy in managing deep caries in vital… (2025) All outcomes | FP 90%, PP 83% (pooled unadjusted 1-year success; no significant difference; no meta-analysis) | 2 studies · 135 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The effectiveness of partial pulpotomy compared with full pulpotomy in managing deep caries in vital permanent teeth with a diagnosis of… 2025 All outcomes | July-August 2023 (1 July to 1 August 2023) | 2 | High / High |
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.