evidencegaps
Primary study · included by 1 review

Clinical and radiographic comparison of indirect pulp treatment using light-cured calcium silicate and mineral trioxide aggregate in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial.

Menon 2016 · Menon Navya P, Varma Balagopal R, Janardhanan Sureshkumar, et al. · Contemporary clinical dentistry · 2016

Included by

Resin-Modified Calcium Silicate-Based Materials Versus Conventional Formulations in Primary Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Vital Pulp Therapy Procedures in Pediatric Dentistry.
Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2026 · cited as Menon 2016 · Table 2; Reference 45
Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Overall clinical and radiographic success
TheraCal LC (resin-modified calcium silicate) for indirect pulp capping vs Non-resin calcium silicate materials (MTA ProRoot, MTA Angelus, Biodentine) · >=360 days
RR 0.94 [0.86, 1.03]2 studies · 153 participantsLow
Overall clinical and radiographic success
TheraCal LC (resin-modified calcium silicate) in vital pulp therapy (ipc, dpc, pulpotomy) vs Non-resin calcium silicate materials (MTA ProRoot, MTA Angelus, Biodentine) · <360 days
RR 0.99 [0.96, 1.02]7 studies · 400 participantsLow
Overall clinical and radiographic success
TheraCal LC (resin-modified calcium silicate) for indirect pulp capping vs Non-resin calcium silicate materials (MTA ProRoot, MTA Angelus, Biodentine) · <360 days
RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.03]5 studies · 218 participantsLow
Overall clinical and radiographic success
TheraCal LC (resin-modified calcium silicate) in vital pulp therapy (ipc, dpc, pulpotomy) vs Non-resin calcium silicate materials (MTA ProRoot, MTA Angelus, Biodentine) · >=360 days
RR 0.95 [0.89, 1.01]5 studies · 355 participantsLow

1 including review in total.