Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

10 questions · 10 findings · 1 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 10 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Low‐level laser therapy vs Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 and 12 months
No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
RR 1.00 [0.24, 4.18]
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Formocresol (FC)

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 and 12 months
No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Calcium hydroxide (CH)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with calcium hydroxide (CH); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 and 12 months
RR 0.50 [0.15, 1.64]
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Calcium hydroxide (CH)

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 and 12 months
No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Formocresol (FC)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with formocresol (FC); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 and 12 months
RR 7.00 [0.39, 124.83]
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Formocresol (FC)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with formocresol (FC); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
RR 7.00 [0.39, 124.83]
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Calcium hydroxide (CH)

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 and 12 months
No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Calcium hydroxide (CH)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with calcium hydroxide (CH); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
RR 0.50 [0.15, 1.64]
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) + calcium hydroxide vs Formocresol (FC)

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 and 12 months
No clinical failure in any participant (Fernandes 2015); not estimable
1 study · 30 participants
GRADE not reported