SynthesisEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2022
Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious lesions in pulp treated primary teeth: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fracture Resistance of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate- and Biodentine-Pulpotomized teeth with Different Restorative Techniques: An in vitro Study.Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) · 2026Article
- Flexural Strength of Different Restorative Materials Used for Direct Restoration in Pediatric Dentistry: An In Vitro Study.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Survival Evaluation of Restorations in Pulpotomized Primary Teeth with MTA or BiodentineJournal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Impact of Shades and Thickness on the Polymerization of Low-Viscosity Bulk-Fill Composites in Pediatric Restorations: An In Vitro Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Survival analysis of pulpotomy versus pulpectomy in primary molars with carious pulp exposure: a retrospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Stress Distribution of Pediatric Zirconia and Stainless Steel Crowns after Pulpotomy Procedure under Vertical Loading: A Patient-Specific Finite Element Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- Hypomineralised second primary molars: the Würzburg concept.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2024Review
- Vital Pulp Therapy of Young First Permanent Molars: A Retrospective Study on Radiographic Findings 24 Months Post-treatment.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo systematically review the clinical performance of restorative materials after pulp therapy of carious primary teeth. It is part 2 of a systematic review on the clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the management of carious primary teeth supporting the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD) guideline development.
methodsFour electronic databases were systematically searched up to December 28th, 2020. Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) on restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth after pulp therapy were included. Failure rate, annual failure rate (AFR) and reasons for failure were recorded. Studies were sorted by restorative materials. The Cochrane Risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2.0) was used for quality assessment.
resultsAfter identification of 1685 articles and screening of 41 papers from EAPD review group 1, 5 RCTs were included. Restored primary molars with pulpotomy presented the following AFRs: composite resin (CR) 0%, preformed metal crowns (PMCs) 2.4-2.5%, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement combined with CR 3.8%, compomer 8.9%, and amalgam 14.3%. Maxillary primary incisors receiving pulpectomy exhibited AFRs of 0-2.3% for composite strip crowns (CSCs) depending on the post chosen. Reasons for failure were secondary caries, poor marginal adaptation, loss of retention and fracture of restoration. All studies were classified as high risk of bias. Meta-analyses were not feasible given the clinical/methodological heterogeneity amongst studies.
conclusionConsidering any limitations of this review, CR and PMCs can be recommended for primary molars after pulpotomy, and CSCs for primary incisors receiving pulpectomy. However, a need for further well-designed RCTs was observed.
Indexed as
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.