Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

42 questions · 63 findings · 8 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 5 · 7.9%GRADE not reported 36 · 57.1%Very low 17 · 27%Low 3 · 4.8%Moderate 2 · 3.2%High 0 · 0%

Selective or stepwise carious tissue removal vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Proportion of dentists selecting selective or stepwise removal · Dentists surveyed about deep carious lesions in permanent teeth

In Oen 2007, 18% of surveyed dentists selected selective or stepwise removal.

12 findings from 1 review
Show 9 more findings

Superselective neck dissection vs Elective selective neck dissection

Disease-free survival · Adults with oral cavity cancer (tongue or floor of mouth) and clinically negative neck nodes
1 finding from 1 review

Superselective neck dissection vs Elective selective neck dissection

Locoregional recurrence · Adults with oral cavity cancer (tongue or floor of mouth) and clinically negative neck nodes
1 finding from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Pulp exposure during caries removal · Children with dentine caries in primary and permanent teeth

Partial caries removal was reported to reduce pulp-exposure risk by 77% versus complete caries removal (RR 0.23; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Pulp exposure during caries removal · Children (3-11 years) with symptomless, vital dentine caries in primary molars

Partial caries removal reduced the reported risk of pulp exposure versus complete caries removal in primary teeth (RR 0.24; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Pulpal disease (signs/symptoms of pulp necrosis) · Children with dentine caries in primary and permanent teeth

The reported estimate did not show a clear difference in pulpal disease after partial versus complete caries removal (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Selective or stepwise carious tissue removal vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Proportion of dentists utilizing SE/SW for deep carious lesions · Dentists managing deep carious lesions in permanent vital teeth

Across nine surveys of 4199 dentists, a pooled 53% (95% CI 44% to 62%) chose selective or stepwise (evidence-based) carious tissue removal for deep lesions in permanent teeth, with very high heterogeneity (I2=96%) and no formal certainty rating (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Selective or stepwise carious tissue removal vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Barriers and facilitators of SE/SW utilization · Dentists managing deep carious lesions in permanent vital teeth

Dentists' use of selective or stepwise removal was shaped by their age and understanding of caries, professional guidelines, peers and professional identity, financial and regulatory incentives, and beliefs about how treatments perform, identified by thematic analysis mapped to the TDF and Behavior Change Wheel (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Selective or stepwise carious tissue removal vs Non-selective or complete carious tissue removal

Temporal change in the proportion of dentists utilizing SE/SW · Dentists managing deep carious lesions in permanent vital teeth

The proportion of dentists choosing selective or stepwise removal rose significantly over time, by about 1.6% per calendar year (meta-regression, p<0.05), a trend the authors described as borderline (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) 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 non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) changes failure of therapy compared with selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) (very low certainty).

3 findings from 1 review

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) 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

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

Selective caries removal (SCR) + composite resin vs Complete caries removal (CCR) + composite resin

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

Selective caries removal (SCR) + composite resin vs Complete caries removal (CCR) + composite resin

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with deep dentine caries in primary molars restored with composite resin (indirect pulp treatment; pulpotomy only if pulp exposed…

Complete caries removal with composite resin had an annual failure rate of 6.8% in primary molars (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated).

2 findings from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) 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…

It is very uncertain whether selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) changes failure of therapy compared with hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Stepwise carious tissue removal (SW)

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