Calcium enriched mixture versus mineral trioxide aggregate in vital pulp therapy in primary teeth: a systematic review.

Aim: This systematic review aimed to assess the clinical and radiographic success of vital pulp therapy in primary teeth using calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) compared to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA). Methods: Five electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the success rates of CEM and MTA as pulp dressing materials in primary teeth. The search strategy included terms related to CEM, vital pulp therapy, and primary teeth. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the revised risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Results: The search yielded 1834 publications, of which three RCTs met the inclusion criteria. These studies, published between 2011 and 2016, included a total of 108 children aged 4-8 years. All included studies were judged to raise some concerns regarding the risk of bias. Conclusions: Based on the limited available evidence, CEM may be considered a potential alternative to MTA for vital pulp therapy in primary teeth, with similar clinical and radiographic success rates. However, due to concerns about study quality and small sample sizes, further well-designed randomized clinical trials are necessary to draw more definitive conclusions.