Selective caries removal (SCR) + composite resin vs Complete caries removal (CCR) + composite resin: Treatment failure (annual failure rate)
- Population
- Children with deep dentine caries in primary molars restored with composite resin (indirect pulp treatment; pulpotomy only if pulp exposed during excavation)
- Intervention
- Selective caries removal (SCR) + composite resin
- Comparison
- Complete caries removal (CCR) + composite resin
- Outcome
- Treatment failure (annual failure rate)
Complete caries removal with composite resin had an annual failure rate of 6.8% in primary molars (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Selective caries removal (SCR) + composite resin vs Complete caries removal (CCR) + composite resin Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with deep dentine caries in primary molars restored with composite resin (indirect pulp treatment; pulpotomy… · 36 months, University, Brazil (Liberman et al. 2020 / Franzon et al. 2015), Complete caries removal (CCR) arm Complete caries removal with composite resin had an annual failure rate of 6.8% in primary molars (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated). Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious lesions in pulp treated… (2022) All outcomes | AFR 6.8 | 1 study · 48 participants | GRADE not reported |
Selective caries removal (SCR) + composite resin vs Complete caries removal (CCR) + composite resin Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with deep dentine caries in primary molars restored with composite resin (indirect pulp treatment; pulpotomy… · 36 months, University, Brazil (Liberman et al. 2020 / Franzon et al. 2015), Selective caries removal (SCR) arm Selective caries removal with composite resin had a higher annual failure rate (17.1%) than complete caries removal in the same trial (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated). Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious lesions in pulp treated… (2022) All outcomes | AFR 17.1 | 1 study · 48 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious lesions in pulp treated primary teeth: a systematic review. 2022 All outcomes | December 28, 2020 | 5 | Low / Low |
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- Survival of composite restorations after selective or total caries removal in primary teeth and predictors of failures: A 36-months… · 2020 · included by 1 of these 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.