SynthesisActa odontologica Scandinavica2025
Clinical efficacy of diode laser for pulpotomy in primary teeth: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in Acta odontologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of diode laser in pulpotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- Laser Pulpotomies' Clinical and Radiographic Success in Primary Teeth by Type of Laser.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy of diode laser for pulpotomy in primary teeth using meta-analysis. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase) were systematically searched to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of diode laser pulpotomy in primary teeth, with the control group receiving conventional treatment without diode laser. This meta-analysis was based on a systematic literature search. Meta-analyses were conducted based on different follow-up times and control groups to assess the clinical and radiographic success rates of diode laser pulpotomy. Results: A total of 17 RCTs met the inclusion criteria, involving 1,018 primary teeth. Meta-analysis results based on different follow-up times (≤ 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, ≥12 months) showed similar clinical success rates (total: relative risk [RR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99-1.03; I2 = 0%) and radiographic success rates (total: RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.02; I2 = 0%) between diode laser pulpotomy and conventional treatment. Meta-analysis based on different control groups (formocresol-zinc oxide eugenol [FC-ZOE], ferric sulfate-zinc oxide eugenol [FS-ZOE], mineral trioxide aggregate-zinc oxide eugenol [MTA-ZOE], simvastatin gel-resin modified glass ionomer cement [SG-REGIC]) showed similar clinical success rates between diode laser pulpotomy and FC-ZOE (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.98-1.02), MTA-ZOE (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.94-1.09), and SG-REGIC (RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.83-1.17), but it was more likely to achieve clinical success compared to FS-ZOE (RR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01-1.07). In addition, diode laser pulpotomy showed similar radiographic success rates with different control groups. Conclusion: Diode laser can be considered as an alternative treatment method to current conventional pulpotomy. However, further high-quality trials are needed to confirm the accuracy and reliability of these findings.
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.