Trial reportEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2024
Comparative evaluation of cervical pulpotomy and pulpectomy for primary molars with irreversible pulpitis: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of oral health-related quality of life following pulp therapy or extraction in paediatric patients: a systematic review.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Pooled it
- Pulpotomy for treating primary teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a call for action.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Pooled it
- Pulp Therapies Rooted in Evidence: IAPD Porto Declaration.International journal of paediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Long-term Outcomes of Invasive Pulp Therapies in Primary Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of NeoPUTTY and mineral trioxide aggregate for full pulpotomy in mature permanent molars with irreversible pulpitis: a randomized clinical study.Biomaterial investigations in dentistry · 2026Article
- Evaluation of post-operative pain after single-sitting pulpectomy using hand versus rotary instrumentation in primary molars.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Treatment Outcomes of Revascularization and Cervical Pulpotomy in Immature Traumatized Maxillary Incisors: A Case Report With 24 Months Follow-Up.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Pioneering Tampon VPT technique: a breakthrough in pediatric dentistry.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2024Article
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 at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this multicentre randomised controlled trial was to compare the clinical/radiographic outcomes of cervical pulpotomy using calcium-enriched mixture cement (PCEM) and pulpectomy using Metapex (PM) in primary molars with irreversible pulpitis (IP).
methodsA total of 134 primary molars from 94 children were randomly assigned to two intervention groups: the PCEM group (n = 74) and the PM group (n = 60). Baseline characteristics including age/gender/molar type/tooth type/jaw were recorded. The primary outcome measures were clinical/radiographic success rates assessed at the first and second follow-up appointments. Secondary outcomes included reasons for clinical/radiographic failures. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the impact of various factors on the success rates.
resultsThe mean age of the participants in both groups was similar (PCEM group: 5.4 years, PM group: 5.5 years). Gender distribution, molar type, tooth type, jaw, and number of practitioners were comparable between the groups. The clinical success rate at the first follow-up was 98.6% in the PCEM group and 96.4% in the PM group. At the second follow-up, the clinical success rate was 97.1% in the PCEM group and 91.1% in the PM group. The radiographic success rates at the first and second follow-up were 98.6% and 96.4% in the PCEM group and 96.4% and 91.1% in the PM group, respectively. Multiple logistic regression analysis did not reveal any significant association between the success rates and age/gender/molar type/jaw, or treatment groups (P > 0.05).
conclusionIn primary molars with IP, both simple/conservative cervical pulpotomy using calcium-enriched mixture cement and pulpectomy using Metapex demonstrated high clinical/radiographic success rates. No significant differences were observed between the two treatment modalities. These findings suggest that both techniques can be considered effective treatment options for managing primary molars with IP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Trial registration number: IRCT20201226049838N1, retrospectively registered on 12 January 2021.
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.