Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM42092871
Efficacy and safety of diode laser in pulpotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Cao Zi-Qi, Pan Nu-Nuo, Jia Fei-Fei, et al. · BMC oral health · 2026 · PubMed · doi:10.1186/s12903-026-08519-9
Findings
Population Children aged 3 to 10 years with vital primary molars with deep caries pulp exposure
914 findings
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months | RR 0.97 [0.92, 1.03] GRADE not reported 9 studies · 708 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.38 [0.15, 0.93] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.19 [0.78, 1.80] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.99 [0.94, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.19 [0.63, 2.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.07 [0.57, 2.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.27 [0.84, 1.93] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.20 [0.80, 1.80] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.20 [0.77, 1.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.70 [0.24, 1.98] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported 15 studies · 1076 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.63 [0.29, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.00 [0.94, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.97 [0.92, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported 15 studies · 1076 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.03 [0.91, 1.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.22 [0.81, 1.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.40 [0.17, 0.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 2018 | RR 0.96 [0.89, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.17 [0.78, 1.77] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported 9 studies · 708 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months | RR 1.02 [0.92, 1.13] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 479 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.01 [0.53, 1.93] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative | RR 1.20 [0.80, 1.80] GRADE not reported 15 studies · 1076 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.59 [0.26, 1.34] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.97 [0.91, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported 15 studies · 1076 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.19 [0.78, 1.80] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.51 [0.20, 1.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.99 [0.96, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.05 [0.37, 3.00] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.18 [0.75, 1.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.25 [0.82, 1.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.02 [0.90, 1.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.18 [0.79, 1.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.35 [0.14, 0.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.97 [0.92, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.20 [0.80, 1.80] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.14 [0.74, 1.75] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.98, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.20 [0.79, 1.81] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.16 [0.76, 1.75] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.18 [0.79, 1.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.01 [0.90, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.77 [0.25, 2.33] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.63 [0.29, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.98, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.20 [0.78, 1.84] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.02 [0.98, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.03] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 515 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.60 [0.26, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.66 [0.30, 1.49] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.04 [0.55, 1.97] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.22 [0.81, 1.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.01 [0.88, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.99 [0.92, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported 15 studies · 1076 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.72 [0.32, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.55 [0.14, 2.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.06 [0.31, 3.67] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.63 [0.29, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months | RR 1.00 [0.98, 1.03] GRADE not reported 13 studies · 888 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.67 [0.30, 1.49] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.02 [0.98, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.97 [0.92, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.66 [0.30, 1.49] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.96 [0.90, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.05 [0.36, 3.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.02 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative | RR 1.18 [0.79, 1.78] GRADE not reported 15 studies · 1076 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.04 [0.68, 1.59] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.05 [0.37, 3.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.87 [0.31, 2.45] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.05 [0.28, 3.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.97 [0.90, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 2018 | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.02 [0.91, 1.14] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.99 [0.53, 1.87] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.89 [0.28, 2.82] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.03 [0.92, 1.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.18 [0.79, 1.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.97 [0.92, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.99 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.89 [0.29, 2.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.63 [0.29, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.04 [0.94, 1.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.97 [0.52, 1.81] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.32 [0.13, 0.80] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.11 [0.72, 1.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative | RR 0.63 [0.29, 1.38] GRADE not reported 15 studies · 1076 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.95 [0.50, 1.82] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.97 [0.91, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.99 [0.93, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.92 [0.34, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.72 [0.32, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.22 [0.81, 1.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.20 [0.80, 1.80] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.09 [0.72, 1.66] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported 13 studies · 888 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.61 [0.27, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.00 [0.98, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.26 [0.83, 1.91] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.01 [0.54, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 2018 | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.33 [0.85, 2.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 479 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.23 [0.81, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.39 [0.17, 0.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 515 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.25 [0.82, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.27 [0.10, 0.73] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.90 [0.30, 2.68] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.62 [0.28, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 2018 | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.06 [0.31, 3.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.24 [0.82, 1.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.02 [1.00, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.82 [0.24, 2.74] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.02 [0.98, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.63 [0.29, 1.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy (any wavelength) | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.21 [0.80, 1.82] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.41 [0.12, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.25 [0.03, 2.19] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.00 [0.07, 14.95] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.33 [0.10, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 2.00 [0.19, 21.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 1.02 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 352 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 1.00 [0.98, 1.03] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 400 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 1.01 [0.94, 1.09] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 352 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.00 [0.94, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.20 [0.01, 6.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.97 [0.88, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.03 [0.71, 1.50] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 0.60 [0.15, 2.46] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 468 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.20 [0.01, 6.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.02 [0.84, 1.24] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.60 [0.15, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 5.00 [0.25, 100.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 0.80 [0.46, 1.40] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 468 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 0.41 [0.12, 1.40] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 468 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.71 [0.14, 3.53] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.33 [0.04, 3.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.60 [0.15, 2.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 2.00 [0.19, 21.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 0.98 [0.91, 1.05] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 110 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.04 [0.00, 0.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 0.71 [0.14, 3.53] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 468 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.02 [0.99, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.43 [0.11, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 5.00 [0.25, 100.43] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 468 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 1.02 [0.97, 1.08] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 400 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.84 [0.47, 1.48] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.33 [0.04, 3.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.02 [0.96, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.03 [0.56, 1.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.91] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 0.20 [0.01, 6.04] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 468 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 5.00 [0.25, 100.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.00 [0.18, 5.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.82 [0.46, 1.49] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.00 [0.91, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.20 [0.04, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.95] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.05 [0.89, 1.25] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.71 [0.14, 3.53] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 0.33 [0.04, 3.13] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 468 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 5.00 [0.25, 100.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.60 [1.19, 2.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 632 to 660 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 632 to 660 nm | RR 1.28 [0.77, 2.13] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 110 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.65 [0.31, 1.34] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.22 [0.63, 2.37] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.95, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.34 [0.90, 2.00] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.69 [0.35, 1.35] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.81 [0.39, 1.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.32 [0.86, 2.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.97 [0.92, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.02 [0.99, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.85 [0.28, 2.56] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.95 [0.86, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 562 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.20 [0.81, 1.79] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.25 [0.84, 1.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.28 [0.86, 1.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.14 [0.76, 1.72] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.97 [0.90, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 469 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.20 [0.38, 3.82] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported 11 studies · 772 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.71 [1.05, 2.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.25 [0.83, 1.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.30 [0.88, 1.93] GRADE not reported 12 studies · 896 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.69 [0.35, 1.35] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 0.96 [0.89, 1.03] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 469 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.95 [0.88, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.09 [0.72, 1.64] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.24 [0.83, 1.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.20 [0.38, 3.81] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.69 [0.35, 1.35] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.00 [0.36, 2.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.02 [0.99, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported 12 studies · 896 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.31 [0.84, 2.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.89 [0.49, 1.64] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.94 [0.86, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.24 [0.83, 1.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.29 [0.07, 1.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.94 [0.87, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 0.95 [0.89, 1.02] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 562 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.48 [0.18, 1.29] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.48 [0.21, 1.14] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.30 [0.88, 1.93] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.95, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.20 [0.81, 1.79] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.13 [0.74, 1.72] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.30 [0.88, 1.93] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.76 [0.38, 1.53] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported 12 studies · 896 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.98 [0.91, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.30 [0.88, 1.93] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.69 [0.35, 1.35] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.68 [0.34, 1.35] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.94 [0.87, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.22 [0.81, 1.84] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.63 [0.31, 1.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.36 [0.47, 3.98] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.97 [0.93, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.37 [0.91, 2.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.32 [0.88, 1.99] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.97 [0.90, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.02 [0.98, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.96 [0.89, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.20 [0.81, 1.79] GRADE not reported 12 studies · 896 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.97 [0.93, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported 12 studies · 896 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.99 [0.96, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.43 [0.11, 1.60] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.76 [0.38, 1.53] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.18 [0.79, 1.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.54 [0.15, 1.91] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.33 [0.48, 3.72] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.03] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 612 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.02 [0.97, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 0.98 [0.94, 1.02] GRADE not reported 11 studies · 772 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.26, 3.90] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.95 [0.88, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 612 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Aripirala | RR 1.00 [0.55, 1.82] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.00 [0.28, 3.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.94 [0.85, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.83 [0.44, 1.57] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 1.13 [0.44, 2.94] GRADE not reported 12 studies · 896 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.60 [0.15, 2.42] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.76 [0.38, 1.53] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.85 [0.47, 1.54] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.00 [0.35, 2.89] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.18 [0.77, 1.82] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.83 [0.26, 2.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.97 [0.91, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm | RR 0.69 [0.35, 1.35] GRADE not reported 12 studies · 896 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.97 [0.93, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.24 [0.83, 1.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelength 810 to 980 nm | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Diode laser wavelength 810 to 980 nm; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.96 [0.89, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.73 [0.25, 2.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.73 [0.25, 2.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.21 [0.07, 0.66] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.30, 3.36] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.54 [0.15, 1.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.22 [0.05, 1.01] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.38 [0.65, 2.92] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.50 [0.70, 3.19] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.59 [0.08, 4.63] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.18 [0.39, 3.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.18 [0.39, 3.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.00 [0.30, 3.36] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.24 [0.61, 2.51] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.39 [0.13, 1.14] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.18 [0.39, 3.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.29 [0.11, 0.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.99 [0.93, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.99 [0.94, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.09 [0.93, 1.28] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 0.67 [0.24, 1.84] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 602 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.00 [0.28, 3.57] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.99 [0.04, 23.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 5.00 [0.25, 100.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.67 [0.24, 1.84] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.98 [0.91, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.99 [0.04, 23.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.99 [0.94, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.18 [0.39, 3.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.31 [0.66, 2.59] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 602 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.99 [0.93, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.41] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.29 [0.33, 5.01] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.99 [0.04, 23.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.29 [0.11, 0.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.00 [0.30, 3.36] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 602 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.30, 3.36] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.32 [0.02, 4.23] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.98 [0.90, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.73 [0.25, 2.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.13 [0.86, 1.50] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 0.29 [0.11, 0.78] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 602 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.75 [0.17, 3.23] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.99 [0.94, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.67 [0.24, 1.84] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 0.99 [0.94, 1.04] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 551 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.95 [0.87, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.00 [0.48, 2.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.00 [0.30, 3.36] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 360 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.18 [0.39, 3.58] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 602 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.99 [0.04, 23.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 0.39 [0.13, 1.14] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 602 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 360 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 0.99 [0.04, 23.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.00 [0.28, 3.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.02 [0.98, 1.06] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 351 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.39 [0.13, 1.14] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.41] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 0.99 [0.04, 23.20] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 602 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.39 [0.13, 1.14] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.29 [0.11, 0.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.94, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.99 [0.94, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.07 [0.94, 1.20] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 351 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.02 [0.97, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 0.97 [0.90, 1.04] GRADE not reported 5 studies · 421 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.73 [0.25, 2.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.40 [0.13, 1.25] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.44 [0.14, 1.41] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.09 [0.91, 1.29] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.43 [0.70, 2.92] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.30, 3.36] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.31 [0.66, 2.59] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.99 [0.04, 23.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 551 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.01 [0.93, 1.10] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol | RR 1.02 [0.99, 1.06] GRADE not reported 5 studies · 424 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.31 [0.66, 2.59] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 0.94 [0.84, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.29 [0.33, 5.01] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.18, 5.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.02 [0.96, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.18 [0.39, 3.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.29 [0.11, 0.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with zinc oxide eugenol as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: zinc oxide eugenol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.38 [0.57, 3.33] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.01 [0.92, 1.12] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.27 [0.33, 4.94] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 262 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.00 [0.14, 7.35] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 262 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.62 [0.16, 2.45] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.08 [0.51, 2.28] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 262 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.31 [0.07, 1.31] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.54 [0.11, 2.61] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 2.11 [0.37, 12.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.62 [0.16, 2.45] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 262 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.82 [0.34, 1.98] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.27 [0.33, 4.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.91 [0.79, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.03 [0.92, 1.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.47 [0.04, 5.69] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.00 [0.81, 1.23] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.72 [0.33, 1.59] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 262 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.80 [0.31, 2.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.07 [0.96, 1.18] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 106 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.02 [0.94, 1.11] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.98 [0.92, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.01 [0.95, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.03 [0.93, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.19 [0.52, 2.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.08 [0.99, 1.17] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.27 [0.33, 4.94] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.08 [0.97, 1.21] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.92, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.00 [0.89, 1.13] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 88 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.84 [0.50, 1.42] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.59 [0.24, 1.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.14, 7.35] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.75 [0.21, 2.67] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 88 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.60 [0.68, 3.79] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.72 [0.33, 1.59] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.00 [0.14, 7.35] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.92, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.06 [0.93, 1.22] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.31 [0.07, 1.31] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 262 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.32 [0.01, 8.26] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.96 [0.86, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 3.13 [0.12, 81.74] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.04 [0.98, 1.11] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 251 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.03 [0.89, 1.19] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 106 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.54 [0.11, 2.61] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.00 [0.16, 6.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.94 [0.77, 1.14] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.03 [0.97, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.05 [0.98, 1.12] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.12 [0.01, 0.97] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.30 [0.31, 5.48] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.31 [0.06, 1.60] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.56 [0.35, 0.88] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.00 [0.94, 1.07] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 156 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.71 [0.22, 13.50] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 3.15 [0.12, 81.74] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.38 [0.07, 2.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.94 [0.83, 1.07] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 156 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.04 [0.95, 1.14] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.52 [0.14, 1.97] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 262 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.31 [0.07, 1.31] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Tenderness Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.52 [0.14, 1.97] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 9 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.98 [0.86, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.03 [0.95, 1.11] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 251 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.70 [0.31, 1.60] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.06 [0.84, 1.34] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: calcium hydroxide | RR 0.41 [0.08, 2.11] GRADE not reported 1 study · 29 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium hydroxide | RR 1.00 [0.91, 1.10] GRADE not reported 1 study · 58 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium hydroxide | RR 1.07 [0.62, 1.87] GRADE not reported 1 study · 58 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium hydroxide | RR 1.00 [0.91, 1.10] GRADE not reported 1 study · 55 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium hydroxide as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium hydroxide | RR 1.06 [0.50, 2.26] GRADE not reported 1 study · 55 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.33 [0.01, 8.22] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.19 [0.01, 4.09] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.33 [0.01, 8.22] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.07] GRADE not reported 1 study · 240 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.03 [0.99, 1.08] GRADE not reported 1 study · 240 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 240 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.19 [0.01, 4.09] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with calcium-enriched mixture as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 6 months · Pulp capping agent: calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 240 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with resin-modified glass ionomer cement as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: resin-modified glass ionomer cement | RR 1.44 [0.55, 3.80] GRADE not reported 1 study · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with resin-modified glass ionomer cement as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: resin-modified glass ionomer cement | RR 0.80 [0.56, 1.13] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with resin-modified glass ionomer cement as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: resin-modified glass ionomer cement | RR 1.83 [0.80, 4.18] GRADE not reported 1 study · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with resin-modified glass ionomer cement as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Pulp capping agent: resin-modified glass ionomer cement | RR 1.35 [0.46, 3.96] GRADE not reported 1 study · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with resin-modified glass ionomer cement as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Radiological success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: resin-modified glass ionomer cement | RR 0.84 [0.61, 1.16] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with resin-modified glass ionomer cement as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 3 months · Pulp capping agent: resin-modified glass ionomer cement | RR 0.95 [0.77, 1.16] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy with resin-modified glass ionomer cement as pulp capping agent | Other pulpotomy techniques or materials (all control groups pooled) | Clinical success 12 months · Pulp capping agent: resin-modified glass ionomer cement | RR 0.95 [0.76, 1.17] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.22 [0.31, 4.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 2.86 [0.57, 14.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.88 [0.35, 2.23] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 3.00 [0.13, 69.52] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.33 [0.00, 25.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.96 [0.90, 1.01] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.27 [0.05, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.13 [0.45, 2.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.50 [0.26, 8.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.96 [0.91, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.75 [0.17, 3.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.27 [0.62, 2.60] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.75 [0.17, 3.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.00 [0.15, 6.83] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.25 [0.03, 2.19] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.50 [0.13, 1.95] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.99 [0.56, 7.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 3.39 [1.35, 8.52] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.97 [0.93, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.00 [0.18, 5.56] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.33 [0.00, 25.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.00 [0.42, 2.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 410 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.99 [0.56, 7.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 2.00 [0.19, 21.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.04] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 128 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.07 [0.75, 1.53] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 185 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.50 [0.26, 8.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.42, 2.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.00 [0.42, 2.40] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.99 [0.56, 7.16] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 507 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.27 [0.05, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.27 [0.05, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.04 [0.00, 0.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.33 [0.00, 25.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.92 [0.81, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.96 [0.92, 1.01] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.92 [0.80, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.96 [0.91, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.50 [0.26, 8.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.33 [0.00, 25.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.33 [0.00, 25.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol | RR 0.33 [0.00, 25.76] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 507 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.00 [0.42, 2.40] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 507 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.95 [0.87, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.75 [0.17, 3.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.14 [0.58, 2.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.98 [0.46, 8.42] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.33 [0.04, 3.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.75 [0.17, 3.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.96, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.13 [0.45, 2.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.31 [0.50, 3.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.27 [0.05, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.93 [0.84, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 1.00 [0.18, 5.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.00 [0.94, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 0.91 [0.80, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.99 [0.97, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Alamoudi | RR 1.50 [0.26, 8.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 0.95 [0.87, 1.03] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 410 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol | RR 0.27 [0.05, 1.62] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 507 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.27 [0.05, 1.62] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.33 [0.00, 25.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.98 [0.91, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.25 [0.03, 2.17] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.00 [0.97, 1.03] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 430 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.50 [0.26, 8.71] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 507 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.23 [0.72, 2.11] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.99 [0.56, 7.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 0.97 [0.93, 1.02] GRADE not reported 7 studies · 430 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.03] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fadhil | RR 5.00 [0.25, 100.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.96 [0.86, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 0.75 [0.17, 3.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.97 [0.89, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 1.02 [0.96, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.50 [0.26, 8.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.50 [0.26, 8.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 507 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol | RR 0.75 [0.17, 3.27] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 507 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari 810nm | RR 0.95 [0.87, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 0.97 [0.92, 1.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.97 [0.90, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Fernandes | RR 1.33 [0.31, 5.78] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 0.97 [0.90, 1.04] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 128 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Formocresol | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 185 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Saltzman | RR 1.01 [0.98, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Formocresol pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Formocresol; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yavagal | RR 0.33 [0.04, 3.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.98 [0.86, 1.13] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 119 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.03 [0.93, 1.13] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 153 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.06 [0.84, 1.34] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 0.50 [0.05, 5.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.25 [0.35, 4.46] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 3.00 [0.13, 69.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.07 [0.87, 1.32] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.91, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.00 [0.24, 4.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.18, 5.50] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 3.00 [0.13, 69.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.08 [0.82, 1.42] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 3.00 [0.33, 27.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.11] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.11] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.00 [0.15, 6.84] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.67 [0.23, 12.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.00 [0.18, 5.50] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 160 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 3.00 [0.33, 27.65] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 160 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 0.99 [0.91, 1.07] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 153 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 3.00 [0.13, 69.70] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.00 [0.92, 1.09] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 119 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.44 [0.45, 4.63] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 160 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.67 [0.41, 6.71] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.97 [0.90, 1.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.00 [0.86, 1.16] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.06 [0.88, 1.26] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.11] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 3.40 [0.87, 13.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 3.00 [0.33, 27.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.00 [0.15, 6.86] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.80 [0.63, 5.11] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.91 [0.71, 5.12] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 160 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.00 [0.18, 5.49] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.06 [0.94, 1.18] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.40 [0.28, 6.89] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 160 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 3.00 [0.33, 27.65] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.03 [0.91, 1.17] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 76 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.98 [0.90, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 0.96 [0.76, 1.22] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.67 [0.41, 6.71] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 160 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 2.00 [0.38, 10.54] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 160 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 2.20 [0.52, 9.39] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate | RR 1.03 [0.93, 1.14] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 76 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.40 [0.29, 6.76] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Niranjani | RR 1.67 [0.23, 12.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ebrahimi | RR 1.03 [0.89, 1.19] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Satyarth | RR 3.00 [0.13, 69.70] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.20 [0.02, 1.66] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.92, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 0.56 [0.13, 2.37] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.92, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 0.87 [0.33, 2.30] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.03 [0.95, 1.12] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.00 [0.91, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.94 [0.74, 1.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.99 [0.91, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.03 [0.95, 1.12] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.00 [0.92, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.56 [0.13, 2.37] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.00 [0.88, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 0.20 [0.02, 1.66] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.04 [0.99, 1.10] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.58] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.97 [0.88, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 1.03 [0.97, 1.09] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.63 [0.06, 6.38] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.66 [0.06, 6.50] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 1.03 [0.95, 1.12] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 133 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 1.04 [0.98, 1.10] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 159 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.03 [0.87, 1.20] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.95 [0.73, 1.25] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.17, 5.98] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 1.00 [0.92, 1.08] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 134 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.04 [0.92, 1.17] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.02 [0.96, 1.08] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 0.98 [0.90, 1.07] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.56 [0.13, 2.37] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 1.00 [0.86, 1.17] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 133 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.85, 1.18] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported 4 studies · 214 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.03 [0.96, 1.10] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.14 [0.01, 2.68] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 0.87 [0.33, 2.30] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 1.50 [0.48, 4.72] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.07] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 1.05 [0.87, 1.27] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.09 [0.89, 1.32] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Lahoti | RR 0.20 [0.02, 1.66] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.07] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 134 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.05 [0.97, 1.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Ansari | RR 0.95 [0.83, 1.09] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate | RR 1.00 [0.89, 1.13] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 159 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Ferric sulfate pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Ferric sulfate; Sensitivity analysis excluding Durmus | RR 1.05 [0.97, 1.15] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.02 [0.94, 1.10] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 98 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.70, 1.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.94, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.03 [0.95, 1.12] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.06] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 96 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.24, 4.18] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.03 [0.95, 1.13] GRADE not reported 1 study · 63 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.91] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.06] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 98 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.94, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.11] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 96 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.00 [0.94, 1.06] GRADE not reported 1 study · 63 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.08 [0.85, 1.37] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.02 [0.91, 1.15] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 94 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.91] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.91] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.02] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 0.78 [0.22, 2.81] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 1.02 [0.95, 1.10] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 94 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.02] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.06] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.91] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.88, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.70, 1.43] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.88, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Electrosurgery | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.91] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Yadav | RR 1.03 [0.95, 1.12] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Electrosurgery pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Electrosurgery; Sensitivity analysis excluding Roy | RR 1.00 [0.88, 1.13] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Simvastatin gel pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Simvastatin gel | RR 0.95 [0.76, 1.17] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Simvastatin gel pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Simvastatin gel | RR 1.29 [0.52, 3.18] GRADE not reported 1 study · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Simvastatin gel pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Simvastatin gel | RR 1.47 [0.87, 2.48] GRADE not reported 1 study · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Simvastatin gel pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Simvastatin gel | RR 0.80 [0.56, 1.13] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Simvastatin gel pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Simvastatin gel | RR 1.33 [0.62, 2.88] GRADE not reported 1 study · 100 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Simvastatin gel pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Simvastatin gel | RR 0.95 [0.77, 1.16] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Simvastatin gel pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Simvastatin gel | RR 0.84 [0.61, 1.16] GRADE not reported 1 study · 92 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium hydroxide pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Calcium hydroxide | RR 1.00 [0.91, 1.09] GRADE not reported 1 study · 59 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium hydroxide pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Calcium hydroxide | RR 1.38 [0.99, 1.93] GRADE not reported 1 study · 59 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium hydroxide pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Calcium hydroxide | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.11] GRADE not reported 1 study · 53 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium hydroxide pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Calcium hydroxide | RR 0.69 [0.33, 1.44] GRADE not reported 1 study · 59 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium hydroxide pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Calcium hydroxide | RR 1.59 [1.02, 2.47] GRADE not reported 1 study · 53 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 2.00 [0.21, 19.23] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 1.00 [0.86, 1.17] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 0.76 [0.54, 1.08] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 3.00 [0.36, 24.92] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 0.91 [0.67, 1.23] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 1.00 [0.86, 1.17] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 0.84 [0.63, 1.12] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Amniotic membrane derivative pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Amniotic membrane derivative | RR 0.82 [0.57, 1.18] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | Radiological success 9 months · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 0.82 [0.57, 1.18] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 1.00 [0.86, 1.17] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 2.00 [0.21, 19.23] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 1.00 [0.86, 1.17] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 3.00 [0.36, 24.92] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 0.91 [0.67, 1.23] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | Clinical success 9 months · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 0.91 [0.67, 1.23] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Chitosan with MTA pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Chitosan with MTA | RR 0.82 [0.57, 1.18] GRADE not reported 1 study · 24 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.95] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.03 [0.96, 1.10] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.05 [0.97, 1.15] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.95] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 1.00 [0.95, 1.05] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Calcium-enriched mixture pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Calcium-enriched mixture | RR 0.20 [0.01, 4.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 80 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Pathological mobility Postoperative · Control group: Biodentine | RR 0.50 [0.05, 5.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Biodentine | RR 0.50 [0.05, 5.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Clinical success 3 months · Control group: Biodentine | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.11] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Pathologic widening of periodontal space Postoperative · Control group: Biodentine | RR 0.50 [0.05, 5.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Radiological success 3 months · Control group: Biodentine | RR 1.00 [0.90, 1.11] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Biodentine | RR 0.50 [0.05, 5.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Biodentine | RR 0.50 [0.05, 5.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Biodentine | RR 0.50 [0.05, 5.04] GRADE not reported 1 study · 36 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Biodentine | RR 1.06 [0.85, 1.32] GRADE not reported 1 study · 32 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Biodentine pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Biodentine | RR 1.06 [0.85, 1.32] GRADE not reported 1 study · 32 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Swelling, abscess or sinus tract Postoperative · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 0.09 [0.01, 1.51] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Furcal or periapical radiolucency Postoperative · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Spontaneous pain Postoperative · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 1.24 [0.94, 1.63] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Tenderness Postoperative · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.85] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 1.12 [0.84, 1.49] GRADE not reported 1 study · 27 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 1.20 [0.91, 1.59] GRADE not reported 1 study · 27 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 1.08 [0.85, 1.37] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Sodium hypochlorite pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Sodium hypochlorite | RR 0.60 [0.17, 2.07] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Er,Cr:YSGG laser pulpotomy | External or internal root resorption Postoperative · Control group: Er,Cr:YSGG laser | RR 1.50 [0.29, 7.73] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Er,Cr:YSGG laser pulpotomy | Radiological success 6 months · Control group: Er,Cr:YSGG laser | RR 1.00 [0.83, 1.21] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Er,Cr:YSGG laser pulpotomy | Clinical success 12 months · Control group: Er,Cr:YSGG laser | RR 1.00 [0.83, 1.21] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Er,Cr:YSGG laser pulpotomy | Radiological success 12 months · Control group: Er,Cr:YSGG laser | RR 1.00 [0.83, 1.21] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
| Diode laser pulpotomy | Er,Cr:YSGG laser pulpotomy | Clinical success 6 months · Control group: Er,Cr:YSGG laser | RR 1.00 [0.88, 1.13] GRADE not reported 1 study · 30 participants |
Included primary studies 15
Open in Studies| Study | Year | Also included by | Outcomes it informs here | Trial data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lahoti 2024 Comparative Evaluation of Amniotic Membrane Derivative, Chitosan with Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, Diode Laser, and Ferric Sulfate as… PMID:39184892 | 2024 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Alamoudi 2020 Clinical and Radiographic Success of Low-Level Laser Therapy Compared with Formocresol Pulpotomy Treatment in Primary Molars. PMID:33087220 | 2020 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ansari 2018 (632 nm) Evaluation of Four Pulpotomy Techniques in Primary Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial. PMID:29692828 | 2018 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ansari 2018 (810 nm) Clinical and radiographic evaluation of diode laser pulpotomy on human primary teeth. PMID:32158064 | 2018 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Aripirala 2021 Comparative evaluation of diode laser and simvastatin gel in pulpotomy of primary molars: A randomized clinical trial. PMID:34810349 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Durmus 2014 In vivo evaluation of the treatment outcome of pulpotomy in primary molars using diode laser, formocresol, and ferric sulphate. PMID:24717147 | 2014 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ebrahimi 2021 Clinical and radiographic effectiveness of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) partial pulpotomy with low power or high power diode laser… PMID:35075598 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Fadhil 2024 Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Diode and Er,Cr:YSGG Lasers as an Alternative to Formocresol and Sodium Hypochlorite for Pulpotomy… PMID:39219956 | 2024 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Fernandes 2015 Clinical and radiographic outcomes of the use of Low-Level Laser Therapy in vital pulp of primary teeth. PMID:24974864 | 2015 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Niranjani 2015 Clinical Evaluation of Success of Primary Teeth Pulpotomy Using Mineral Trioxide Aggregate(®), Laser and Biodentine(TM)- an In Vivo Study. PMID:26023640 | 2015 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Roy 2023 Comparative Evaluation of Low-level Diode Laser and Electrosurgical Pulpotomy in Primary Molars. PMID:37731801 | 2023 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Saltzman 2005 Assessment of a novel alternative to conventional formocresol-zinc oxide eugenol pulpotomy for the treatment of pulpally involved human… PMID:16238654 | 2005 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Satyarth 2021 Comparative Evaluation of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate Pulpotomy and Laser-Assisted Mineral Trioxide Aggregate Pulpotomy: An Original… PMID:33850706 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Yadav 2014 Comparative evaluation of Ferric Sulfate, Electrosurgical and Diode Laser on human primary molars pulpotomy: an "in-vivo" study. PMID:24771970 | 2014 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Yavagal 2022 Efficacy of laser photobiomodulation pulpotomy in human primary teeth: A randomized controlled trial. PMID:35102971 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
Overlap with other reviews
Reviews that include the same primary studies are not independent evidence. Shared counts match studies by PMID, DOI or NCT, and otherwise by author and year (a probable match). Only the non-Cochrane dental reviews have study lists, so overlap with Cochrane reviews is not counted yet.
| Review | Shared studies | Jaccard |
|---|---|---|
| Chitosan pulpotomy medicaments versus conventional agents in primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2026) | 1 | 0.06 |
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Children aged 3-10 years with primary molars with pulp exposure due to deep caries, vital pulp, no irreversible pulpitis or periapical periodontitis | Children aged 3 to 9 years, 1092 primary teeth (n=15 RCTs) |
| Intervention | Diode laser pulpotomy (partial or full coronal), no restriction on parameters | Diode laser pulpotomy, wavelengths 632-980 nm (n=15) |
| Comparison | Vital pulpotomy using non-diode-laser methods (traditional methods or other approaches) | Formocresol, ferric sulfate, MTA, simvastatin gel, calcium hydroxide, CEM, Biodentine, amniotic membrane derivative, chitosan + MTA, NaClO, electrosurgery, Er,Cr:YSGG laser |
| Outcomes | Clinical and radiographic success; postoperative adverse events | Clinical success, radiographic success at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months; spontaneous pain, swelling/abscess/sinus tract, tenderness, pathological mobility, widening of periodontal space, furcal or periapical radiolucency, root resorption |
| Study designs | RCTs | RCTs (n=15) |
| Timing | Not specified | 3, 6, 9 and 12 months |