Question · asked by 1 review
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH): Radiological failure
- Population
- Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth
- Intervention
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)
- Comparison
- Calcium hydroxide (CH)
- Outcome
- Radiological failure
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) may leads to lower radiological failure compared with calcium hydroxide (CH) (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versionsNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 1 · 50%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 12 months Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) may leads to lower radiological failure compared with calcium hydroxide (CH) (low certainty). Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane All outcomes | RR 0.12 [0.04, 0.36] | 4 studies · 150 participants | Low |
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide (CH) Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · up to 24 months Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth (2018) · Cochrane All outcomes | No radiological failure in any participant; not estimable | 1 study · 50 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 treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2017-08 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Ferric sulphate (FS) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Portland cement (PC) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs 3Mix (ciprofloxacin + metronidazole + minocycline) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs 3Mixtatin · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) + sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Full strength or 1:5 diluted formocresol (FC) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs simvastatin · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Calcium hydroxide + sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs EMD (enamel matrix derivative) alone · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 1 review
- Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Formocresol (FC) · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth · 0 reviews
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.