ReviewThe Saudi dental journal2024
Pulpotomy in primary teeth: Biodentine™ versus calcium hydroxide. A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in The Saudi dental journal, 2024. 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.
- Twelve-month outcomes and exploratory outcome indicators after iRoot BP Plus pulpotomy in primary molars: a retrospective real-world cohort study.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
- Pulpotomy in Primary Molars with Deep Caries Using Biodentine: A Case Series with 1-Year Follow-Up.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Pulpotomy is the total amputation of coronal pulp tissue and subsequent placement of a pulpotomy agent over the root canal orifices, followed by a coronal seal. The most suitable pulpotomy agent for successful treatment outcomes remains controversial. Objectives: To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic success of calcium hydroxide (CH) and Biodentine (BD) in primary tooth pulpotomy at 6 and 12 months. Materials and methods: An automatised search of the PubMed-Medline, Web of Science, and SCOPUS electronic databases was performed to identify scientific articles on primary tooth pulpotomies with either calcium hydroxide (CH) or Biodentine (BD) as a pulpotomy agent, published until January 2024. The software used for meta-analysis was R 4.3.1 (R Core Team, 2023). Results: Of the 594 potentially eligible articles, 14 met the inclusion criteria: seven articles on CH pulpotomy and seven articles on BD pulpotomy with 6- and 12-months of follow-up. The meta-analysis concluded a mean clinical success rate of 91.8 % at 6 months and 79.0 % at 12 months for the CH group, and 99.2 % at 6 months and 98.8 % at 12 months for the BD group. In terms of the mean radiographic success, the CH group achieved 74.2 % at 6 months and 63.7 % at 12 months, whereas the BD group achieved 99.4 % at 6 months and 98.4 % at 12 months. In comparison, the meta-analysis concluded a marginally significant difference in clinical success in favour of the BD group at 6 months (p = 0.091). At 12 months, clinical success was significant in the BD group (p = 0.023). Regarding radiographic success, a significant difference in favour of the BD group was observed at 6 (p = 0.008) and 12 months (p < 0.001). Conclusion: BD showed significantly higher clinical and radiographic success than CH in pulpotomy.
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.