Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
RMGIC had an annual failure rate of 1.9-16.9% (4 RCTs), lower than amalgam and similar to compomer/composite; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with moderately deep dentine caries in primary molars, no pulp therapy
Etch-and-rinse adhesion failed more than self-etch (19.5% vs 7.0% annual failure) in one RCT; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
Amalgam restorations in primary teeth showed a wide annual failure rate (1-28%) across 4 RCTs; the evidence is of low quality (high risk of bias; ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
High-viscosity GIC had a wide annual failure rate (2.9-25.6%) and was outperformed by compomer/composite in some trials (3 RCTs); low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with Class-I carious lesions in primary molars, no pulp therapy
A beveled margin lowered composite resin failure (1.8% vs 3.5% annual failure) in one RCT; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with carious primary teeth treated by atraumatic restorative treatment (hand-instrument caries removal), no pulp therapy
ART restorations (mainly GIC) had a wide annual failure rate (1.2-37.1%) across 10 RCTs, with technique affecting survival; low to unclear quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
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
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children (aged 3-5.5 years) with early childhood caries in anterior primary teeth (>=2 carious surfaces), no pulp therapy
Zirconia crowns failed less than composite strip crowns (3.3% vs 15% annual failure) in one RCT; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
Metal-reinforced GIC had a high annual failure rate (29.9%) in a single RCT; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
Compomer had an annual failure rate of 0-14.7% (7 RCTs), comparable to amalgam/RMGIC/composite and better than high-viscosity GIC; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
Conventional GIC had an annual failure rate of 7.6-16.6% (2 RCTs) and failed more than amalgam in one trial; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) by cavity class · Children with carious primary teeth restored in Class-I versus Class-II cavities, no pulp therapy
Class-II restorations failed more than Class-I (annual failure 5-28.9% vs 1.2-14.7% in ART studies); low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children (aged 3-8 years) with 2-surface occluso-proximal dentine caries in primary molars, no pulp therapy
Preformed metal (Hall) crowns had a low reported annual failure rate (3.1%) versus compomer (14.7%) in one RCT; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
Composite resin (hybrid 0-19.5%; bulk-fill 0-16.9%) performed comparably to or better than most alternatives across 11 RCTs; evidence is of low to unclear quality (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Not applicable (no eligible studies) · Children with carious primary teeth (no pulp therapy)
No eligible RCTs assessed new bio-active restorative materials in carious primary teeth; this is an evidence gap identified by the review.
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with previously unrestored, vital carious lesions in primary teeth (no pulp therapy); aged 1.5-11 years
Glass carbomer had very high failure rates (up to 46.2%) in a single RCT, far worse than composite resin or RMGIC; low quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth after vital or non-vital pulp therapy
In one RCT, selective caries removal had a 3.44 higher probability of failure than complete caries removal.
1 finding from 1 review
Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth after vital or non-vital pulp therapy
In one RCT, composite strip crowns with composite posts had an annual failure rate of 2.3% after 1 year.
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with carious primary molars treated by pulpotomy (vital pulp therapy)
Compomer restorations had an annual failure rate of 8.9% in primary molars after pulpotomy, higher than composite resin in the same trial (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated).
2 findings from 1 review
Restoration failure · Children with carious primary teeth after vital or non-vital pulp therapy
In one RCT, composite resin had an annual failure rate of 0% after 2 years.
1 finding from 1 review