Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

107 questions · 124 findings · 13 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 3 · 2.4%GRADE not reported 68 · 54.8%Very low 43 · 34.7%Low 3 · 2.4%Moderate 7 · 5.6%High 0 · 0%

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) may leads to higher failure of therapy compared with hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

Efficiency, costs or cost-effectiveness · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…
1 finding from 1 review

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Non-restorative cavity control (NRCC)

Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

It is very uncertain whether non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) changes failure of therapy compared with non-restorative cavity control (NRCC) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Biodentine vs Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)

Tooth discoloration · Patients with carious pulp exposure in permanent teeth undergoing DPC or pulpotomy

More tooth discoloration was observed with MTA than with Biodentine, but odds ratios were implausibly large and not pooled (3 RCTs; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Biodentine vs Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Patients with carious pulp exposure in permanent teeth undergoing DPC or pulpotomy

MTA and Biodentine performed comparably for clinical and radiographic success (5 RCTs, not pooled; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Bulk-fill composite resin with 15-second dentine etching vs Bulk-fill composite resin with 7-second dentine etching

Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth

No comparative effect estimate was reported; the 7-second etching arm had a lower tabulated failure rate.

1 finding from 1 review

Sealing using sealant materials vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)

Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

It is very uncertain whether sealing using sealant materials changes failure of therapy compared with selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Sealing using sealant materials vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)

Lesion progression · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Cavitated lesions, primary dentition
    Lesion progression reported narratively: Dias 2018 1/27 sealed vs 1/21 SE at 24 months; Hesse 2014 0/17 sealed vs 0/17 SE at 18 months; not pooled and not GRADE-rated.
    2 studies
    GRADE not reported

Sealing using sealant materials vs Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR)

Lesion progression · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…
1 finding from 1 review

Sealing using sealant materials vs Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR)

Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

It is very uncertain whether sealing using sealant materials changes failure of therapy compared with non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Minimally invasive caries removal (MIT): selective removal to soft dentin, self-limiting chemomechanical removal, or partial/incomplete caries removal vs Conventional caries removal (CT): selective removal to firm dentin, stepwise excavation, or complete caries removal

Pulp exposure rate · Patients with deep carious lesions in permanent (mainly posterior) teeth

Minimally invasive caries removal was associated with a lower mean pulp exposure rate than conventional removal (1.2% vs 8.1%), but the difference was not statistically significant (Wilcoxon, p = 0.068); certainty of evidence was not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimally invasive caries removal (MIT): selective removal to soft dentin, self-limiting chemomechanical removal, or partial/incomplete caries removal vs Conventional caries removal (CT): selective removal to firm dentin, stepwise excavation, or complete caries removal

Treatment success (caries lesion arrest or restoration survival) · Patients with deep carious lesions in permanent (mainly posterior) teeth

Minimally invasive caries removal showed a marginally higher mean restoration success rate than conventional removal (83.6% vs 75.4%), but the difference was not statistically significant (Mann-Whitney U, p > 0.05); certainty of evidence was not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Resin-modified glass ionomer fissure sealant vs Fluoride varnish

Progression of dentinal carious lesions into enamel or dentine · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)

Resin-modified glass ionomer fissure sealant showed no clear difference in progression of dentinal carious lesions into enamel or dentine compared with fluoride varnish; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Resin-based fissure sealant plus fluoride varnish vs Fluoride varnish

Progression of dentinal carious lesions into enamel or dentine · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Resin-based fissure sealant (visible-light-polymerized) vs Fluoride varnish

Incidence of dentinal carious lesion on treated occlusal surfaces of molars or premolars (yes/no) · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)

It is very uncertain whether resin-based fissure sealant (visible-light-polymerized) changes incidence of dentinal carious lesion on treated occlusal surfaces of… compared with fluoride varnish (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Bulk-fill composite resin with 7-second dentine etching vs Bulk-fill composite resin with 15-second dentine etching

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children (aged 5-8 years) with Class-II caries in primary molars, no pulp therapy

Etching dentine for 7 s rather than 15 s lowered bulk-fill composite failure (5.8% vs 16.9% annual failure) in one RCT; low quality of evidence (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

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 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