ReviewCureus2026
Effectiveness of Pulpotomy in the Management of Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis in Mature Permanent Teeth: An Umbrella Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this umbrella review is to analyze the conclusions drawn from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on pulpotomy effectiveness in the treatment of irreversible pulpitis in mature permanent teeth, focusing on the impact of pulp capping materials and factors influencing treatment outcomes. A search of electronic databases (PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) was conducted up to December 2022 using the keywords: Pulpotomy, Child, Permanent mature teeth, Irreversible pulpitis. The methodological quality of systematic reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) 2 tool. Of the 332 articles selected, 11 were chosen for data extraction, focusing on pulpotomy success in treating irreversible pulpitis in mature permanent teeth, and evaluating the influence of materials and techniques on outcomes. Applying AMSTAR 2 criteria, only one systematic review was rated "moderate" quality; most were rated as "low" to "very low" quality. This umbrella review reported a very high pulpotomy success rate, up to 100%, varying with materials and follow-up duration. Pulpotomy success rates range from 37% to 100%, depending on the material used, with Biodentine® (Septodont, Saint-Maur-des-Fossés, France), achieving the highest success rate. Short-term pulpotomy success rates ranged from 80% to 95%, exceeding root canal treatment, while long-term outcomes remain comparable. Pulpotomy success depends on pre- and perioperative conditions, hemostasis, and definitive coronal restoration. Analysis of systematic reviews indicates that pulpotomy is a promising alternative to conventional root therapy for managing irreversible pulpitis in mature permanent teeth. Available evidence remains limited, emphasizing the need for high-quality trials to confirm its effectiveness.
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.