ArticleCase reports in dentistry2018
Clinical and Radiographic Success of Selective Caries Removal to Firm Dentin in Primary Teeth: 18-Month Follow-Up.
Article in Case reports in dentistry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Four-year clinical prospective follow-up of resin composite restoration after selective caries removal using Er:YAG laser.Clinical oral investigations · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The selective caries removal is increasingly spreading in daily clinical practice because this minimally invasive technique treats deep carious lesion and decreases the risk of pulp exposure. This case report was aimed at describing the selective removal to firm dentin on the primary mandibular left first molar of a girl aged 7 years and 6 months. The Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA Angelus™) was used as liner, and the tooth was definitively restored with resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Vitremer™). The clinical and radiographic following-up was performed at 6, 12, and 18 months after treatment. The treatment showed satisfactory results after 18-month following-up, suggesting that this minimally invasive approach for carious lesion removal can replace the total removal, when properly indicated. Notwithstanding, further randomized clinical trials with longer following-up periods are still necessary.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.