SynthesisPloS one2025
Overall success rate of permanent teeth pulpotomy using ProRoot MTA: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of the physicochemical and biological properties of calcium silicate-based pulp capping materials.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the success rate of pulpotomy in permanent teeth using ProRoot MTA.
methodsAn unrestricted search was carried out in 6 electronic databases, until August 2024. The selection of studies adhered to the PIOS criteria, encompassing only randomized clinical trials that assessed the success rate of pulpotomy in permanent teeth using ProRoot MTA through clinical and radiographic evaluations. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB-2 tool, and meta-analyses were conducted through RevMan 5.3 and R software. To determine the quality of evidence, the GRADE tool was employed.
resultsThe initial search yielded 971 studies. After removing duplicates, 468 studies underwent initial screening, and 32 studies were considered for eligibility. In the final selection, 26 studies were included, and among these, 14 were categorized as having high risk of bias. The analysis of pulpotomy in permanent teeth using ProRoot MTA revealed an overall success rate of 96%, 90%, and 96% at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up periods, respectively, and an annual failure rate of 8%. Meta-analyses indicated a significantly higher success rate for pulpotomies in teeth with open apex. Upon applying the GRADE assessment, an overall moderate level of evidence was observed.
conclusionPulpotomy in permanent teeth using ProRoot MTA yields a success rate exceeding 90%, even up to a 24-month follow-up period. Nonetheless, the certainty of evidence supporting these outcomes is moderate, highlighting the requirement for well-designed randomized clinical trials with extended follow-up durations. Registration This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number CRD42023451466).
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.