ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2026
Bacterial cellulose-enhanced MTA versus conventional MTA for indirect pulp capping in primary teeth: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic success rates of bacterial cellulose-reinforced MTA (BC-MTA) and conventional MTA in indirect pulp capping (IPT) treatment of primary teeth. A total of 40 primary molars diagnosed for IPT were randomly allocated into two groups: Group I (BC-MTA, n = 20) and Group II (Conventional MTA, n = 20). IPT procedures were carried out under aseptic conditions following local anesthesia, and teeth were restored with glass ionomer cement (GIC). Follow-up evaluations were performed clinically and radiographically at 3 and 9 months postoperatively. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20, applying descriptive statistics, Chi-square, and independent t-tests (p < 0.05). At the end of 9 months, 75% of cases reported complete pain relief. Internal root resorption was observed in two teeth in Group I. Overall success rates at 9 months were 88.23% for BC-MTA and 100% for conventional MTA. Both BC-MTA and MTA showed favorable and comparable outcomes in IPT of primary teeth. While BC-MTA demonstrates potential due to its biocompatibility and improved handling characteristics, further studies are needed to validate its long-term clinical efficacy.Trial Registration: Ethical clearance was granted by SRM University IEC (SRMIEC-ST0323-442) and registered retrospectively in CTRI (CTRI/2024/12/077670).
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.