Question · asked by 1 review

Pulpotomy with Biodentine vs Pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA): Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success)

Population
Human permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis due to carious pulp exposure
Intervention
Pulpotomy with Biodentine
Comparison
Pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)
Outcome
Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success)

Biodentine had a significantly higher pulpotomy success rate than MTA (indirect comparison; numeric estimate not available); ungraded.

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Pulpotomy with Biodentine vs Pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)
Clinical and radiographic success rate (>=6 months) · Human permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis due to carious pulp exposure · >=6 months, Clinical (endodontic/dental), Pulp capping material: Biodentine vs MTA
Biodentine had a significantly higher pulpotomy success rate than MTA (indirect comparison; numeric estimate not available); ungraded.
Outcome of pulpotomy in permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2022) All outcomes
Biodentine demonstrated a statistically significantly higher success rate than MTA (indirect comparison; numeric estimate in Supplementary Table S5, not available).Not reportedGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Outcome of pulpotomy in permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
2022 All outcomes
January 2021 (articles from January 1960 to January 2021)11Low

The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.

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.