What do systematic reviews say?

5 questions · 5 findings · 2 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 5 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Pulpotomy with Biodentine vs Pulpotomy with Calcium Enriched Mixture (CEM)

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Human permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis due to carious pulp exposure

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

1 finding from 1 review

Outcome of pulpotomy in permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2022 All outcomes
>=6 months · Clinical (endodontic/dental) · Pulp capping material: Biodentine vs CEM
Biodentine demonstrated a statistically significantly higher success rate than CEM (indirect comparison; Supplementary Table S5, not available).
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported

Pulpotomy with Biodentine vs Pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2)

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Human permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis due to carious pulp exposure

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

1 finding from 1 review

Outcome of pulpotomy in permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2022 All outcomes
>=6 months · Clinical (endodontic/dental) · Pulp capping material: Biodentine vs calcium hydroxide
Biodentine demonstrated a statistically significantly higher success rate than calcium hydroxide (indirect comparison; Supplementary Table S5, not available).
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported

Pulpotomy with Biodentine vs Pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Human permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis due to carious pulp exposure

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

1 finding from 1 review

Outcome of pulpotomy in permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2022 All outcomes
>=6 months · Clinical (endodontic/dental) · Pulp capping material: Biodentine vs MTA
Biodentine demonstrated a statistically significantly higher success rate than MTA (indirect comparison; numeric estimate in Supplementary Table S5, not available).
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported

Partial pulpotomy with tri-calcium silicate material (MTA or Biodentine) vs No comparator

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Adults aged 18 years or older with mature permanent teeth and carious pulp exposure

Partial pulpotomy with MTA or Biodentine had a pooled success rate of 86.8%.

1 finding from 1 review

Partial pulpotomy for carious pulp exposure in adult mature permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomes
At least 1 year · MTA or Biodentine
Success rate (%) 86.8 [83.78, 89.82]
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported

Partial pulpotomy with tri-calcium silicate material (MTA or Biodentine) vs Partial pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Adults aged 18 years or older with mature permanent teeth and carious pulp exposure

Partial pulpotomy with tri-calcium silicate cements (MTA/Biodentine) has a much higher success rate than with calcium hydroxide in adults (86.8% vs 34.3%; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Partial pulpotomy for carious pulp exposure in adult mature permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomes
>=1 year (subgroups at 1, 2, 5 years) · Dental/endodontic clinical practice · Capping material (tri-calcium silicate vs calcium hydroxide)
MD 52.5
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported