Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

3,429 questions · 3,558 findings · 436 reviews

No studies found 660 · 18.5%GRADE not reported 375 · 10.5%Very low 727 · 20.4%Low 887 · 24.9%Moderate 709 · 19.9%High 200 · 5.6%

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Buffered glutaraldehyde

Outcome not reported · 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 months
    Assessed pain, soft tissue, mobility, radiolucency, root resorption, pulp canal obliteration (Goyal 2016); no clinical/radiological failure outcome; pain, mobility, radiolucency, root resorption significantly favour MTA
    1 study · 60 participants
    GRADE not reported

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Diode laser

Outcome not reported · 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 months
    Assessed pain, soft tissue, mobility, radiolucency, root resorption, premature tooth loss (Niranjani 2015); no clinical/radiological failure outcome; no significant differences (RR 0.33, 0.01 to 7.72)
    1 study · 40 participants
    GRADE not reported

Calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement vs Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth
2 findings from 1 review

ProRoot MTA vs RetroMTA

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

ProRoot MTA showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with retroMTA; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vitapex (calcium hydroxide/iodoform) vs Sealapex (eugenol-free calcium hydroxide)

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

Vitapex (calcium hydroxide/iodoform) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with sealapex (eugenol-free calcium hydroxide); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Glutaraldehyde + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) vs Full strength formocresol (FC)

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

Glutaraldehyde + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with full strength formocresol (FC); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review