ReviewJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Following Pulpotomy Using Biodentine in Carious Exposed Mature Permanent Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Vital pulp therapy is increasingly used in managing mature permanent teeth exposed to caries. Biodentine, a tricalcium silicate-based material, has emerged as a potential alternative to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) in pulpotomy procedures due to its favorable properties of handling and biocompatibility. The aim was to systematically evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of biodentine and MTA as pulpotomy agents in mature permanent teeth exposed to caries. Materials and Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered with International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD4202457708) and followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Scopus, EBSCOhost, OpenGrey, and relevant journals was conducted up to August 31, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies comparing biodentine and MTA in mature permanent teeth with carious pulp exposure were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist, and statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4. The certainty of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Results: Seven RCTs were included in the systematic review, of which three were eligible for meta-analysis. The pooled results showed no significant difference between biodentine and MTA regarding clinical and radiographic success (odds ratio = 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.24-2.49; Conclusion: Both biodentine and MTA demonstrate comparable clinical and radiographic success as pulpotomy agents in mature permanent teeth exposed to caries pulp. Given its advantageous handling and lower discoloration potential, biodentine may serve as a suitable alternative to MTA. Further high-quality trials are warranted to strengthen the current evidence base.
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.