Skip to content
2000
Volume 22, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1573-3963
  • E-ISSN: 1875-6336

Abstract

Background

Systematic reviews (SRs) represent the most robust source of evidence for informing decision-making. While there are rigorous protocols for properly conducting SRs, sometimes the methodological biases in the primary studies are accounted for in the conclusions of the SRs.

Objectives

This study aimed to map the evidence regarding the management of caries lesions in primary teeth.

Methods

Two reviewers conducted a systematic search up to March 2024 in electronic databases. Any SR concerning the management of caries lesions in primary teeth was considered eligible.

Results

About 162 SRs were included. Among these, 80 focused on restorative treatments, 64 on endodontic treatments, and 18 on non-invasive treatments. Only 42.6% presented a study registration protocol. The majority (67.9%) performed a meta-analysis, while a minority exclusively carried out qualitative data analysis. Despite 92.6% of the SRs evaluating the methodological quality or risk of bias of the primary studies using some tool, only 24% assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach, resulting in classifications ranging from very low to moderate.

Conclusion

There is a limited adherence to study registration protocols, indicating a need for improvements in this practice. Additionally, among the few SRs that used the GRADE approach, the majority demonstrated levels of very low to moderate certainty.

© 2026 Bentham Science Publishers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cpr/10.2174/0115733963290288240813050512
2024-08-27
2025-12-09

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cpr/10.2174/0115733963290288240813050512
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. SackettDL RosenbergWMC GrayJAM HaynesRB RichardsonWS Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t bmj 1996312702371210.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 8555924
     [Google Scholar]
  2. ClarksonJ. WorthingtonH. Leadership in evidence based dentistry.J. Dent.20198716910.1016/j.jdent.2019.05.012 31075375
     [Google Scholar]
  3. MunizF.W.M.G. CelesteR.K. OballeH.J.R. RösingC.K. Citation analysis and trends in review articles in dentistry.J. Evid. Based Dent. Pract.201818211011810.1016/j.jebdp.2017.08.003 29747791
     [Google Scholar]
  4. MejàreI.A. KlingbergG. MowafiF.K. Stecksén-BlicksC. TwetmanS.H.A. TranæusS.H. A systematic map of systematic reviews in pediatric dentistry-what do we really know?PLoS One2015102e011753710.1371/journal.pone.0117537 25706629
     [Google Scholar]
  5. PageMJ McKenzieJE BossuytPM The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews bmj 2021372n7110.1136/bmj.n7133782057
     [Google Scholar]
  6. HigginsJ.P.T. ThomasJ. ChandlerJ. CumpstonM. LiT. PageM.J. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021)Cochrane2021Available from: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
    [Google Scholar]
  7. JayaramanJ. NagendrababuV. PulikkotilS.J. InnesN.P. Critical appraisal of methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta‐analysis in paediatric dentistry journals.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201828654856010.1111/ipd.12414 30070003
     [Google Scholar]
  8. KassebaumN.J. BernabéE. DahiyaM. BhandariB. MurrayC.J.L. MarcenesW. Global burden of untreated caries: A systematic review and metaregression.J. Dent. Res.201594565065810.1177/0022034515573272 25740856
     [Google Scholar]
  9. BaniHaniA Santamaría RM, Hu S, Maden M, Albadri S. Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: An umbrella review.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202223566769310.1007/s40368‑021‑00675‑6 34784027
     [Google Scholar]
  10. MainardesJ. Metaresearch in the field of educational policy: Conceptual and methodological elements.Educ. Rev.2018347230331910.1590/0104‑4060.59762
     [Google Scholar]
  11. TedescoT.K. CalvoA.F.B. PássaroA.L. Nonrestorative treatment of initial caries lesion in primary teeth: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Acta Odontol. Scand.20228011810.1080/00016357.2021.1928748 34102948
     [Google Scholar]
  12. BoothA. ClarkeM. DooleyG. The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: An international prospective register of systematic reviews.Syst. Rev.201211210.1186/2046‑4053‑1‑2 22587842
     [Google Scholar]
  13. MoherD. LiberatiA. TetzlaffJ. AltmanD.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement.Int. J. Surg.20108533634110.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007 20171303
     [Google Scholar]
  14. dos SantosM.B.F. AgostiniB.A. BassaniR. PereiraG.K.R. Sarkis-OnofreR. Protocol registration improves reporting quality of systematic reviews in dentistry.BMC Med. Res. Methodol.20202015710.1186/s12874‑020‑00939‑7 32160871
     [Google Scholar]
  15. LeeY.H. An overview of meta-analysis for clinicians.Korean J. Intern. Med.201833227728310.3904/kjim.2016.195 29277096
     [Google Scholar]
  16. AiemE. Smaïl-FaugeronV. Muller-BollaM. Aesthetic preformed paediatric crowns: Systematic review.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201727427328210.1111/ipd.12260 27532506
     [Google Scholar]
  17. LamontT. SchwendickeF. InnesN. Why we need a core outcome set for trials of interventions for prevention and management of caries.Evid. Based Dent.2015163666810.1038/sj.ebd.6401109 26492796
     [Google Scholar]
  18. SchünemannH.J. HigginsJ.P.T. VistG.E. Chapter 14: Completing ‘Summary of findings’ tables and grading the certainty of the evidence.In: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Wiley-Blackwell201937540210.1002/978119536604.ch14
     [Google Scholar]
  19. IoannidisJ.P.A. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Milbank Q.201694348551410.1111/1468‑0009.12210 27620683
     [Google Scholar]
  20. AlmeidaH.C.R. OliveiraG.H.P. CaladoR.V. Non-invasive methods and the use of infiltrating resins for the control of caries progression in deciduous teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pesqui. Bras. Odontopediatria Clin. Integr.202323e22002810.1590/pboci.2023.062
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Ancira-GonzálezL. Esparza-VillalpandoV. Garrocho-RangelA. Pozos-GuillénA. White spot lesion remineralisation agents in primary teeth: A systematic review.Oral Health Prev. Dent.2018165391400 30460352
     [Google Scholar]
  22. CebulaM. GöstemeyerG. KroisJ. Resin infiltration of non-cavitated proximal caries lesions in primary and permanent teeth: A systematic review and scenario analysis of randomized controlled trials.J. Clin. Med.202312272710.3390/jcm12020727 36675656
     [Google Scholar]
  23. ChenY. ChenD. LinH. Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Oral Health20212111310.1186/s12903‑020‑01364‑4 33413327
     [Google Scholar]
  24. ChengL. YuanR. FanH. SiM. HaoZ. FengZ. The effect of the Er, Cr:YSGG laser combined casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate for enamel remineralisation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies.Lasers Med. Sci.202338120110.1007/s10103‑023‑03864‑5 37667086
     [Google Scholar]
  25. ChibinskiA.C. WambierL.M. FeltrinJ. LoguercioA.D. WambierD.S. ReisA. Silver diamine fluoride has efficacy in controlling caries progression in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Caries Res.201751552754110.1159/000478668 28972954
     [Google Scholar]
  26. ContrerasV. ToroM.J. Elías-BonetaA.R. Encarnación-BurgosA. Effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride in caries prevention and arrest: A systematic literature review.Gen. Dent.20176532229 28475081
     [Google Scholar]
  27. DuangthipD. JiangM. ChuC.H. LoE.C.M. Non-surgical treatment of dentin caries in preschool children – Systematic review.BMC Oral Health20151514410.1186/s12903‑015‑0033‑7 25888484
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ElrashidA. AlshaijiB. SalehS. ZadaK. BaseerM. Efficacy of resin infiltrate in noncavitated proximal carious lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Int. Soc. Prev. Community Dent.20199321121810.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_26_19 31198691
     [Google Scholar]
  29. GaoS.S. ZhaoI.S. HiraishiN. Clinical trials of silver diamine fluoride in arresting caries among children.JDR Clin. Trans. Res.20161320121010.1177/2380084416661474 30931743
     [Google Scholar]
  30. JainM. JabinZ. VishnupriyaV. AgarwalN. NasimI. SharmaA. Effect of 38% silver diamine fluoride on control of dental caries in primary dentition: A systematic review.J. Family Med. Prim. Care2020931302130710.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1017_19 32509608
     [Google Scholar]
  31. JafarzadehD. RezapourR. AbbasiT. The effectiveness of fluoride varnish and fissure sealant in elementary school children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Iran. J. Public Health202251226627710.18502/ijph.v51i2.8680 35866130
     [Google Scholar]
  32. LiY. TannerA. Effect of antimicrobial interventions on the oral microbiota associated with early childhood caries.Pediatr. Dent.2015373226244 26063552
     [Google Scholar]
  33. PapageorgiouS.N. DimitrakiD. KotsanosN. BekesK. van WaesH. Performance of pit and fissure sealants according to tooth characteristics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Dent.20176681710.1016/j.jdent.2017.08.004 28797916
     [Google Scholar]
  34. TolbaZ.O. HamzaH.S. MohebD.M. HassaneinH.E. El SayedH.M. Effectiveness of two concentrations 12% versus 38% of silver diamine fluoride in arresting cavitated dentin caries among children: A systematic review.Gaz. Egypt. Paediatr. Assoc.20196711710.1186/s43054‑019‑0001‑y
     [Google Scholar]
  35. TrieuA. MohamedA. LynchE. Silver diamine fluoride versus sodium fluoride for arresting dentine caries in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Sci. Rep.201991211510.1038/s41598‑019‑38569‑9 30765785
     [Google Scholar]
  36. ZaffaranoL. SalernoC. CampusG. Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) efficacy in arresting cavitated caries lesions in primary molars: A systematic review and metanalysis.Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health202219191291710.3390/ijerph191912917 36232217
     [Google Scholar]
  37. AïemE. JosephC. GarciaA. Smaïl-FaugeronV. Muller-BollaM. Caries removal strategies for deep carious lesions in primary teeth: Systematic review.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.202030439240410.1111/ipd.12616 31943437
     [Google Scholar]
  38. AjayakumarL.P. ChowdharyN. ReddyV.R. ChowdharyR. Use of restorative full crowns made with zirconia in children: A systematic review.Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.2020135551558 33623346
     [Google Scholar]
  39. AlrashdiM. ArdoinJ. LiuJ.A. Zirconia crowns for children: A systematic review.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.2022321668110.1111/ipd.12793 33772904
     [Google Scholar]
  40. AlzanbaqiS.D. AlogaielR.M. AlasmariM.A. Zirconia crowns for primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analyses.Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health2022195283810.3390/ijerph19052838 35270531
     [Google Scholar]
  41. AmendS. BoutsioukiC. BekesK. Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth without pulp therapy: A systematic review.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202223572775910.1007/s40368‑022‑00725‑7 35819627
     [Google Scholar]
  42. de AmorimR.G. FrenckenJ.E. RaggioD.P. ChenX. HuX. LealS.C. Survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and sealants in posterior teeth: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Clin. Oral Investig.20182282703272510.1007/s00784‑018‑2625‑5 30232622
     [Google Scholar]
  43. AttariN. RobertsJ.F. Restoration of primary teeth with crowns: A systematic review of the literature.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.200612586210.1007/BF03320816 17140529
     [Google Scholar]
  44. KhanF.R. BadarS.B. TabassumS. GhafoorR. Effectiveness of hall technique for primary carious molars: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201912544545210.5005/jp‑journals‑10005‑1666 32440052
     [Google Scholar]
  45. BaghlafK. SindiA.E. AlmughalliqF.A. Effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride in indirect pulp capping in primary molars: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Heliyon202399e1946210.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19462 37809634
     [Google Scholar]
  46. ChadwickB.L. EvansD.J.P. Restoration of class II cavities in primary molar teeth with conventional and resin modified glass ionomer cements: A systematic review of the literature.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.200781142110.1007/BF03262565 17394886
     [Google Scholar]
  47. ChaudhariH. PatilR. JatharP. JainC. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials on survival rate of atraumatic restorative treatment compared with conventional treatment on primary dentition.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.202240211211710.4103/jisppd.jisppd_119_22 35859401
     [Google Scholar]
  48. ChisiniL.A. CollaresK. CademartoriM.G. Restorations in primary teeth: A systematic review on survival and reasons for failures.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201828212313910.1111/ipd.12346 29322626
     [Google Scholar]
  49. ChuaD.R. TanB.L. NazzalH. SrinivasanN. DuggalM.S. TongH.J. Outcomes of preformed metal crowns placed with the conventional and Hall Techniques: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.202333214115710.1111/ipd.13029 36151937
     [Google Scholar]
  50. CoelhoA. AmaroI. ApolónioA. Effect of cavity disinfectants on adhesion to primary teeth—A systematic review.Int. J. Mol. Sci.2021229439810.3390/ijms22094398 33922376
     [Google Scholar]
  51. DiasA.G.A. MagnoM.B. DelbemA.C.B. CunhaR.F. MaiaL.C. PessanJ.P. Clinical performance of glass ionomer cement and composite resin in Class II restorations in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Dent.20187311310.1016/j.jdent.2018.04.004 29649506
     [Google Scholar]
  52. DorriM. Martinez-ZapataM.J. WalshT. MarinhoV.C.C. Sheiham deceased A, Zaror C. Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries.Cochrane Database Syst201720183CD00807210.1002/14651858.CD008072.pub2 29284075
     [Google Scholar]
  53. DuangthipD. JiangM. ChuC.H. LoE.C. Restorative approaches to treat dentin caries in preschool children: Systematic review.Eur. J. Paediatr. Dent.2016172113121 27377109
     [Google Scholar]
  54. MajidiniaS. EbrahimiM. JananiA. SadeghiR. ShiraziA. Are self-etch adhesives reliable for primary tooth dentin? A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Conserv. Dent.201821324325010.4103/JCD.JCD_287_17 29899624
     [Google Scholar]
  55. EbrahimiM. MajidiniaS. SarrafA. Effect of chlorhexidine on immediate and delayed bond strength between resin and dentin of primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Front. Dent.20221939 36873616
     [Google Scholar]
  56. FariaL.V. FernandesT.O. GuimarãesL.S. CajazeiraM.R.R. AntunesL.S. AntunesL.A.A. Does selective caries removal in combination with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy affect the clinical performance of adhesive restorations of primary or permanent teeth? A systematic review with meta-analysis.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.2022465114 36624909
     [Google Scholar]
  57. FerreiraJ.M. PinheiroS.L. SampaioF.C. de MenezesV.A. Caries removal in primary teeth-A systematic review.Quintessence Int.2012431e9e15 22259813
     [Google Scholar]
  58. FrenckenJ.E. LiangS. ZhangQ. Survival estimates of atraumatic restorative treatment versus traditional restorative treatment: A systematic review with meta-analyses.Br. Dent. J.202111110.1038/s41415‑021‑2701‑0 33883705
     [Google Scholar]
  59. FröhlichT.T. GindriL.D. SoaresF.Z.M. de Oliveira RochaR. Does the etching strategy influence the bonding of universal adhesive systems to primary teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.20212261015102210.1007/s40368‑021‑00639‑w 34085204
     [Google Scholar]
  60. GindriL.D.O. FröhlichT.T. RossoC.R. RochaR.O. Etching time and bonding of adhesive systems to dentin of primary teeth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.202131112213010.1111/ipd.12711 33405356
     [Google Scholar]
  61. HamamaH.H.H. YiuC.K.Y. BurrowM.F. KingN.M. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials on chemomechanical caries removal.Oper. Dent.2015404E167E17810.2341/14‑021‑LIT 26167737
     [Google Scholar]
  62. HuS. BaniHani A, Nevitt S, Maden M, Santamaria RM, Albadri S. Hall Technique for primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Jpn. Dent. Sci. Rev.20225828629710.1016/j.jdsr.2022.09.003 36185501
     [Google Scholar]
  63. IaculliF. SalucciA. Di GiorgioG. Bond strength of self-adhesive flowable composites and glass ionomer cements to primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies.Materials20211421669410.3390/ma14216694 34772221
     [Google Scholar]
  64. InchingoloA.M. InchingoloA.D. LatiniG. Caries prevention and treatment in early childhood: Comparing strategies. A systematic review.Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci.202327221108211092 38039039
     [Google Scholar]
  65. InnesNPT RickettsD ChongLY KeightleyAJ LamontT SantamariaRM Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth.Cochrane Database Syst2015201512CD00551210.1002/14651858.CD005512.pub326718872
    [Google Scholar]
  66. JiangM. MeiM.L. WongM.C.M. ChuC.H. LoE.C.M. Effect of silver diamine fluoride solution application on the bond strength of dentine to adhesives and to glass ionomer cements: A systematic review.BMC Oral Health20202014010.1186/s12903‑020‑1030‑z 32024501
     [Google Scholar]
  67. JoshiR.S. GokhaleN.S. HugarS.M. SonetaS. BadakarC.M. SaxenaN. Longevity of stainless steel crowns on primary molars- A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Sci Soc2023502838
     [Google Scholar]
  68. KilpatrickN.M. NeumannA. Durability of amalgam in the restoration of class II cavities in primary molars: A systematic review of the literature.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.20078151310.1007/BF03262564 17394885
     [Google Scholar]
  69. LaiG. Lara CapiC. CoccoF. Comparison of Carisolv system vs traditional rotating instruments for caries removal in the primary dentition: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta Odontol. Scand.201573856958010.3109/00016357.2015.1023353 25772193
     [Google Scholar]
  70. LenziT.L. GimenezT. TedescoT.K. MendesF.M. RochaR.O. RaggioD.P. Adhesive systems for restoring primary teeth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of in vitro studies.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201626536437510.1111/ipd.12210 26561769
     [Google Scholar]
  71. LiT. ZhangX. ShiH. MaZ. LvB. XieM. Er:YAG laser application in caries removal and cavity preparation in children: A meta-analysis.Lasers Med. Sci.201934227328010.1007/s10103‑018‑2582‑x 30003427
     [Google Scholar]
  72. da Mota MartinsV. ParanhosL.R. de OliveiraM.N. MaiaL.C. MachadoA.C. Santos-FilhoP.C.F. Does the addition of chlorhexidine to glass ionomer cements influence its antimicrobial effect and survival rate? A systematic review.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202223336537910.1007/s40368‑022‑00699‑6 35286624
     [Google Scholar]
  73. MaruV.P. ShakuntalaB.S. NagarathnaC. Caries removal by chemomechanical (Carisolv™) vs. Rotary drill: A systematic review.Open Dent. J.20159146247210.2174/1874210601509010462 26962375
     [Google Scholar]
  74. McCombD. Systematic review of conservative operative caries management strategies.J. Dent. Educ.200165101154116110.1002/j.0022‑0337.2001.65.10.tb03465.x 11699993
     [Google Scholar]
  75. MickenautschS. YengopalV. BanerjeeA. Atraumatic restorative treatment versus amalgam restoration longevity: A systematic review.Clin. Oral Investig.201014323324010.1007/s00784‑009‑0335‑8 19688227
     [Google Scholar]
  76. MickenautschS. YengopalV. Absence of carious lesions at margins of glass-ionomer cement and amalgam restorations: An update of systematic review evidence.BMC Res. Notes2011415810.1186/1756‑0500‑4‑58 21396097
     [Google Scholar]
  77. MiottiL.L. VissottoC. De NardinL. Does the liner material influence pulpal vitality in deep carious cavities submitted to selective caries removal? A network meta-analysis review.Clin. Oral Investig.202327127143715610.1007/s00784‑023‑05372‑w 37932637
     [Google Scholar]
  78. NairM. GurunathanD. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of calcium hydroxide vs other agents in indirect pulp capping of primary teeth: A systematic review.Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201912543744410.5005/jp‑journals‑10005‑1672 32440051
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Ortiz-RuizA.J. Pérez-GuzmánN. Rubio-AparicioM. Sánchez-MecaJ. Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: A meta-analysis.Sci. Rep.2020101640910.1038/s41598‑020‑63497‑4 32286461
     [Google Scholar]
  80. PatnanaA.K. ChughV.K. ChughA. VangaN.R.V. KumarP. Effectiveness of zirconia crowns compared with stainless steel crowns in primary posterior teeth rehabilitation.J. Am. Dent. Assoc.20221532158166.e510.1016/j.adaj.2021.08.005 35086644
     [Google Scholar]
  81. PedrottiD. CavalheiroC.P. CasagrandeL. Does selective carious tissue removal of soft dentin increase the restorative failure risk in primary teeth?J. Am. Dent. Assoc.20191507582590.e110.1016/j.adaj.2019.02.018 31153548
     [Google Scholar]
  82. PilcherL. PahlkeS. UrquhartO. Direct materials for restoring caries lesions.J. Am. Dent. Assoc.20231542e1e9810.1016/j.adaj.2022.09.012 36610925
     [Google Scholar]
  83. PintoN.S. JorgeG.R. VasconcelosJ. ProbstL.F. De-CarliA.D. FreireA. Clinical efficacy of bioactive restorative materials in controlling secondary caries: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC Oral Health202323139410.1186/s12903‑023‑03110‑y 37322456
     [Google Scholar]
  84. PiresC.W. PedrottiD. LenziT.L. SoaresF.Z.M. ZiegelmannP.K. RochaR.O. Is there a best conventional material for restoring posterior primary teeth? A network meta-analysis.Braz. Oral Res.201832e1010.1590/1807‑3107bor‑2018.vol32.0010 29513886
     [Google Scholar]
  85. RaggioD.P. TedescoT.K. CalvoA.F.B. BragaM.M. Do glass ionomer cements prevent caries lesions in margins of restorations in primary teeth?J. Am. Dent. Assoc.2016147317718510.1016/j.adaj.2015.09.016 26581769
     [Google Scholar]
  86. RickettsD. LamontT. InnesN.P.T. KiddE. ClarksonJ.E. Operative caries management in adults and children.Cochrane Libr.20133CD00380810.1002/14651858.CD003808.pub3 23543523
     [Google Scholar]
  87. da RosaW.L.O. LimaV.P. MoraesR.R. PivaE. da SilvaA.F. Is a calcium hydroxide liner necessary in the treatment of deep caries lesions? A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. Endod. J.201952558860310.1111/iej.13034 30387864
     [Google Scholar]
  88. RuengrungsomC. PalamaraJ.E.A. BurrowM.F. Comparison of ART and conventional techniques on clinical performance of glass-ionomer cement restorations in load bearing areas of permanent and primary dentitions: A systematic review.J. Dent.20187812110.1016/j.jdent.2018.07.008 30017937
     [Google Scholar]
  89. SantamaríaR.M. AbudryaM.H. GülG. MouradM.H.D.S. GomezG.F. ZandonaA.G.F. How to intervene in the caries process: Dentin caries in primary teeth.Caries Res.202054430632310.1159/000508899 32854105
     [Google Scholar]
  90. SantosA.P. MoreiraI.K. ScarpelliA.C. PordeusI.A. PaivaS.M. MartinsC.C. Survival of adhesive restorations for primary molars: A systematic review and metaanalysis of clinical trials.Pediatr. Dent.2016385370378 28206891
     [Google Scholar]
  91. SantosP.S. PedrottiD. BragaM.M. RochaR.O. LenziT.L. Materials used for indirect pulp treatment in primary teeth: A mixed treatment comparisons meta-analysis.Braz. Oral Res.201731e10110.1590/1807‑3107/2017.vol31.0101 29267662
     [Google Scholar]
  92. SchmoeckelJ. GorsetaK. SpliethC.H. JuricH. How to intervene in the caries process: Early childhood caries – A systematic review.Caries Res.202054210211210.1159/000504335 31910415
     [Google Scholar]
  93. SchwendickeF. GöstemeyerG. BlunckU. ParisS. HsuL.Y. TuY.K. Directly placed restorative materials.J. Dent. Res.201695661362210.1177/0022034516631285 26912220
     [Google Scholar]
  94. SchwendickeF. WalshT. LamontT. Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions.Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.202177CD013039 34280957
     [Google Scholar]
  95. SchwendickeF. GöstemeyerG. GluudC. Cavity lining after excavating caries lesions: Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.J. Dent.201543111291129710.1016/j.jdent.2015.07.017 26265350
     [Google Scholar]
  96. SchwendickeF. ParisS. TuY.K. Effects of using different criteria for caries removal: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.J. Dent.201543111510.1016/j.jdent.2014.10.004 25456612
     [Google Scholar]
  97. SealeN.S. RandallR. The use of stainless steel crowns: A systematic literature review.Pediatr. Dent.2015372145160 25905656
     [Google Scholar]
  98. da SilvaCL CavalheiroCP GimenezT ImparatoJCP BussadoriSK LenziTL Bonding performance of universal and contemporary adhesives in primary teeth: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of in vitro studies.Pediatr Dent20214331707[Erratum in: Pediatr Dent202143257] 34172109
     [Google Scholar]
  99. SiokisV. MichailidisT. KotsanosN. Tooth-coloured materials for class II restorations in primary molars: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.20212261003101310.1007/s40368‑021‑00632‑3 34046871
     [Google Scholar]
  100. SouzaA.L.M. MagalhãesT.C. LopesA.G. CarloH.L. SantosR.L. CarloF.G.C. Which material has the highest longevity in primary molars: Composite resin or glass ionomer cement? - A systematic review of the literature.HU Rev201844115122
     [Google Scholar]
  101. StratigakiE. TongH.J. SeremidiK. KloukosD. DuggalM. GizaniS. Contemporary management of deep caries in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202223569572510.1007/s40368‑021‑00666‑7 34981447
     [Google Scholar]
  102. StruzikN. WiśniewskaK. PiszkoP.J. SEM studies assessing the efficacy of laser treatment for primary teeth: A systematic review.Appl. Sci.2024143110710.3390/app14031107
     [Google Scholar]
  103. TedescoT.K. BonifácioC.C. CalvoA.F.B. GimenezT. BragaM.M. RaggioD.P. Caries lesion prevention and arrestment in approximal surfaces in contact with glass ionomer cement restorations – A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201626316117210.1111/ipd.12174 26072946
     [Google Scholar]
  104. TedescoT.K. CalvoA.F.B. LenziT.L. ART is an alternative for restoring occlusoproximal cavities in primary teeth – Evidence from an updated systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201727320120910.1111/ipd.12252 27489205
     [Google Scholar]
  105. TedescoT.K. GimenezT. FlorianoI. Scientific evidence for the management of dentin caries lesions in pediatric dentistry: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.PLoS One20181311e020629610.1371/journal.pone.0206296 30462676
     [Google Scholar]
  106. TedescoT.K. ReisT.M. Mello-MouraA.C.V. Management of deep caries lesions with or without pulp involvement in primary teeth: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Braz. Oral Res.202135e00410.1590/1807‑3107bor‑2021.vol35.0004 33206777
     [Google Scholar]
  107. TohS.L. MesserL.B. Evidence-based assessment of tooth-colored restorations in proximal lesions of primary molars.Pediatr. Dent.2007291815 18041507
     [Google Scholar]
  108. ValentimF.B. MoreiraK.M.S. CarneiroV.C. do NascimentoL.J. ColaresV. ImparatoJ.C.P. Cost-effectiveness and acceptance in children and parents of the hall technique: Systematic review of clinical trials.J. Contemp. Dent. Pract.2023241210161025 38317401
     [Google Scholar]
  109. van’t HofM.A. FrenckenJ.E. HeldermanW.H.P. HolmgrenC.J. The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach for managing dental caries: A meta-analysis.Int. Dent. J.200656634535110.1111/j.1875‑595X.2006.tb00339.x 17243467
     [Google Scholar]
  110. WakhlooT. ReddyS. SharmaS. ChugA. DixitA. ThakurK. Silver diamine fluoride versus atraumatic restorative treatment in pediatric dental caries management: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Int. Soc. Prev. Community Dent.202111436737510.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_83_21 34430496
     [Google Scholar]
  111. WolfT.G. CampusG. Cost-effectiveness of treatment decisions for early childhood caries in infants and toddlers: A systematic review.Medicina20235910186510.3390/medicina59101865 37893583
     [Google Scholar]
  112. YengopalV. HarnekerS.Y. PatelN. SiegfriedN. Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition.Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.20092CD004483 19370602
     [Google Scholar]
  113. ZafarS. SiddiqiA. Biological responses to pediatric stainless steel crowns.J. Oral Sci.202062324524910.2334/josnusd.20‑0083 32522913
     [Google Scholar]
  114. Zambrano-AchigP. Viteri-GarcíaA. Verdugo-PaivaF. Chemo-mechanical removal versus conventional removal for deep caries lesion.MedWave2022221e832010.5867/medwave.2022.01.8320 35100249
     [Google Scholar]
  115. ZhaoY. LiuD. TianY. BaiD. Effect of Carisolv chemomechanical method in treatment of deciduous tooth caries: A meta-analysis.J Jilin Univ (Med Ed)2021473694700
     [Google Scholar]
  116. AgarwalS. BendgudeV. KakodkarP. Evaluation of success rate of lesion sterilization and tissue repair compared to vitapex in pulpally involved primary teeth: A systematic review.J. Conserv. Dent.201922651051510.4103/JCD.JCD_76_20 33088056
     [Google Scholar]
  117. AlrayesN. AlmaimouniY. TounsiA. TarabzouniK. AlonaizanF. Salem IbrahimM. The effect of an antibacterial mixture and non-instrumentation endodontic treatment in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analyses.Saudi Dent. J.202335657558810.1016/j.sdentj.2023.06.001 37823084
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Argueta-FigueroaL. JuradoC.A. Torres-RosasR. Bautista-HernándezM.A. AlhotanA. NurrohmanH. Clinical efficacy of biomimetic bioactive biomaterials for dental pulp capping: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Biomimetics20227421110.3390/biomimetics7040211 36546911
     [Google Scholar]
  119. AraújoLP GobboLB SilvaTA Photodynamic therapy in the root canal treatment of primary teeth: A systematic review of clinical trials.Int J Paediatr Dent2023342ipd.1308810.1111/ipd.1308837195228
     [Google Scholar]
  120. AsifA. SubramanianE.M.G. Obturation techniques in primary teeth using Endoflas as obturation material – a systematic review.Int J Res Pharmaceut Sci202011467276734 https://ijrps.com/home/article/view/1732
    [Google Scholar]
  121. AnsariG. Safi AghdamH. TaheriP. Ghazizadeh AhsaieM. Laser pulpotomy—an effective alternative to conventional techniques—A systematic review of literature and meta-analysis.Lasers Med. Sci.20183381621162910.1007/s10103‑018‑2588‑4 30014215
     [Google Scholar]
  122. AminabadiN.A. Asl AminabadN. JamaliZ. ShiraziS. Primary tooth pulpectomy overfilling by different placement techniques: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Dent. Res. Dent. Clin. Dent. Prospect.202014425026110.34172/joddd.2020.043 33575016
     [Google Scholar]
  123. ArduimA.S. GonçalvesD.P. CasagrandeL. LenziT.L. Is lentulospiral the best option for root canal filling of endodontically treated primary teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202122453754510.1007/s40368‑021‑00615‑4 33763823
     [Google Scholar]
  124. ShirvaniA. AsgaryS. Mineral trioxide aggregate versus formocresol pulpotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Clin. Oral Investig.20141841023103010.1007/s00784‑014‑1189‑2 24452827
     [Google Scholar]
  125. BarcelosR. SantosM.P.A. PrimoL.G. LuizR.R. MaiaL.C. ZOE paste pulpectomies outcome in primary teeth: A systematic review.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201135324124810.17796/jcpd.35.3.y777187463255n34 21678664
     [Google Scholar]
  126. Barja-FidalgoF. Moutinho-RibeiroM. OliveiraM.A.A. OliveiraB.H. A systematic review of root canal filling materials for deciduous teeth: Is there an alternative for zinc oxide-eugenol?ISRN Dent.201120111710.5402/2011/367318 21991471
     [Google Scholar]
  127. BonzaniniL.I.L. CavalheiroC.P. SchererM.M. Reciprocating and rotatory niti instruments used for root canal preparation of primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pesqui. Bras. Odontopediatria Clin. Integr.202121e001610.1590/pboci.2021.124
     [Google Scholar]
  128. a BoutsioukiC. FrankenbergerR. KrämerN. Relative effectiveness of direct and indirect pulp capping in the primary dentition.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.2018195297309 30187263
     [Google Scholar]
  129. b BoutsioukiC. Clinical and radiographic success of (partial) pulpotomy and pulpectomy in primary teeth: A systematic review.Eur. J. Paediatr. Dent.202122427328535034465
     [Google Scholar]
  130. ChoucheneF. MasmoudiF. BaazizA. MaatoukF. GhediraH. Antibiotic mixtures in noninstrumental endodontic treatment of primary teeth with necrotic pulps: A systematic review.Int. J. Dent.2021202111210.1155/2021/5518599 34135965
     [Google Scholar]
  131. ChughV.K. PatnanaA.K. ChughA. KumarP. WadhwaP. SinghS. Clinical differences of hand and rotary instrumentations during biomechanical preparation in primary teeth—A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.202131113114210.1111/ipd.12720 32815216
     [Google Scholar]
  132. CollJ.A. SealeN.S. VargasK. MarghalaniA.A. Al ShamaliS. GrahamL. Primary tooth vital pulp therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatr. Dent.201739116123 28292337
     [Google Scholar]
  133. CollJ.A. VargasK. MarghalaniA.A. A systematic review and meta-analysis of nonvital pulp therapy for primary teeth.Pediatr. Dent.2020424256461 32847665
     [Google Scholar]
  134. CollJ.A. DharV. ChenC.Y. Primary tooth vital pulp treatment interventions: Systematic review and meta-analyses.Pediatr. Dent.2023456474546 38129755
     [Google Scholar]
  135. De CosterP. RajasekharanS. MartensL. Laser‐assisted pulpotomy in primary teeth: A systematic review.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201323638939910.1111/ipd.12014 23171469
     [Google Scholar]
  136. DuarteM.L. PiresP.M. FerreiraD.M. Is there evidence for the use of lesion sterilization and tissue repair therapy in the endodontic treatment of primary teeth? A systematic review and meta-analyses.Clin. Oral Investig.20202492959297210.1007/s00784‑020‑03415‑0 32666347
     [Google Scholar]
  137. BandiS. ElicherlaS.R. SaikiranK.V. NunnaM. SahitiP.S. NuvvulaS. The clinical and radiographic success of Endoflas compared with other root canal obturating materials in primary teeth: A systematic review.Dent. Res. J. (Isfahan)20221917210.4103/1735‑3327.356805 36407777
     [Google Scholar]
  138. TahririanD. FaghihianR. AminiK. Rotary versus manual instrumentation for root canal preparation in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.Contemp. Clin. Dent.202213319720410.4103/ccd.ccd_77_20 36213852
     [Google Scholar]
  139. FirooziP. SalmanB.N. AslaminabadiN. Clinical and radiographic comparison of Biodentine and Formocresol: An updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202223685586710.1007/s40368‑022‑00715‑9 35596042
     [Google Scholar]
  140. HaridossSR.B. SwaminathanKP.A. Shaping properties and outcomes of nickel-titanium reciprocation systems in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies.Cureus20221411e3099510.7759/cureus.30995 36475144
     [Google Scholar]
  141. Fallahinejad GhajariM. MirkarimiM. VatanpourM. Kharrazi FardM.J. Comparison of pulpotomy with formocresol and MTA in primary molars: A systematic review and meta- analysis.Iran. Endod. J.2008334549 24146670
     [Google Scholar]
  142. GadallahL. HamdyM. El BardissyA. Abou El YazeedM. Pulpotomy versus pulpectomy in the treatment of vital pulp exposure in primary incisors. A systematic review and meta-analysis.F1000 Res.20187156010.12688/f1000research.16142.2 31249668
     [Google Scholar]
  143. Garrocho-RangelA. Esparza-VillalpandoV. Pozos-GuillenA. Outcomes of direct pulp capping in vital primary teeth with cariously and non‐cariously exposed pulp: A systematic review.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.202030553654610.1111/ipd.12633 32078201
     [Google Scholar]
  144. GopinathV.K. PulikkotilS.J. VeettilS.K. Comparing the clinical and radiographic outcomes of pulpotomies in primary molars using bioactive endodontic materials and ferric sulfate - A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.J. Evid. Based Dent. Pract.202222410177010.1016/j.jebdp.2022.101770 36494111
     [Google Scholar]
  145. GhorpadeT.M. KatgeF.A. PoojariM.S. ShettyS.K. DeshpandeS.S. JainR.N. Success rate of triple antibiotic paste for lesion sterilization and tissue repair therapy in primary molars: A systematic review.World J. Dent.20231412112118
     [Google Scholar]
  146. GuoJ. ZhangN. ChengY. Comparative efficacy of medicaments or techniques for pulpotomy of primary molars: A network meta-analysis.Clin. Oral Investig.20232719110410.1007/s00784‑022‑04830‑1 36580161
     [Google Scholar]
  147. JasaniB. MusaleP. JasaniB. Efficacy of Biodentine versus formocresol in pulpotomy of primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Quintessence Int.2022538698705 35976738
     [Google Scholar]
  148. JayaramanJ. NagendrababuV. PulikkotilS.J. VeettilS.K. DharV. Effectiveness of formocresol and ferric sulfate as pulpotomy material in primary molars: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.Quintessence Int.20205113848 31781690
     [Google Scholar]
  149. JiaL. ZhangX. ShiH. LiT. LvB. XieM. The clinical effectiveness of calcium hydroxide in root canal disinfection of primary teeth: A meta-analysis.Med. Sci. Monit.2019252908291610.12659/MSM.913256 31004424
     [Google Scholar]
  150. StringhiniJuniorE. VitcelM.E.B. OliveiraL.B. Evidence of pulpotomy in primary teeth comparing MTA, calcium hydroxide, ferric sulphate, and electrosurgery with formocresol.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.201516430331210.1007/s40368‑015‑0174‑z 25833280
     [Google Scholar]
  151. StringhiniJuniorE. dos SantosM.G.C. OliveiraL.B. MercadéM. MTA and biodentine for primary teeth pulpotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.Clin. Oral Investig.20192341967197610.1007/s00784‑018‑2616‑6 30238414
     [Google Scholar]
  152. KattanH.F. The efficacy of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in the disinfection of coronal and radicular dentine of primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Photodiagn. Photodyn. Ther.20234410369710.1016/j.pdpdt.2023.103697 37473792
     [Google Scholar]
  153. BiswasK.P. KaushalD. ReddyS.G. DixitA. ChowdhryR. ChugA. Apical extrusion of debris with root canal instrumentation in primary teeth: A systematic review.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.202240191810.4103/jisppd.jisppd_298_21 35439877
     [Google Scholar]
  154. TiwariS. KulkarniP. AgrawalN. KumarA. UmarekarP. BhargavaS. Clinical outcome of direct pulp therapy in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.202240210511110.4103/jisppd.jisppd_210_22 35859400
     [Google Scholar]
  155. LinP.Y. ChenH.S. WangY.H. TuY.K. Primary molar pulpotomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.J. Dent.20144291060107710.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.001 24513112
     [Google Scholar]
  156. LohA. O’HoyP. TranX. Evidence-based assessment: Evaluation of the formocresol versus ferric sulfate primary molar pulpotomy.Pediatr. Dent.2004265401409 15460294
     [Google Scholar]
  157. ManchandaS. SardanaD. YiuC.K.Y. A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing rotary canal instrumentation techniques with manual instrumentation techniques in primary teeth.Int. Endod. J.202053333335310.1111/iej.13233 31587323
     [Google Scholar]
  158. MarghalaniA.A. OmarS. ChenJ.W. Clinical and radiographic success of mineral trioxide aggregate compared with formocresol as a pulpotomy treatment in primary molars.J. Am. Dent. Assoc.2014145771472110.14219/jada.2014.36 24982277
     [Google Scholar]
  159. NagendrababuV. PulikkotilS.J. VeettilS.K. JinatongthaiP. GutmannJ.L. Efficacy of biodentine and mineral trioxide aggregate in primary molar pulpotomies—A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.J. Evid. Based Dent. Pract.2019191172710.1016/j.jebdp.2018.05.002 30926099
     [Google Scholar]
  160. NajjarR.S. AlamoudiN.M. El-HousseinyA.A. Al TuwirqiA.A. SabbaghH.J. A comparison of calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste and zinc oxide eugenol as root filling materials for pulpectomy in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Clin. Exp. Dent. Res.20195329431010.1002/cre2.173 31249711
     [Google Scholar]
  161. AsokanS. NatchiyarN. PriyaP.R.G. KumarT.D.Y. Comparison of clinical and radiographic success of rotary with manual instrumentation techniques in primary teeth: A systematic review.Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.202114181310.5005/jp‑journals‑10005‑1879 34326578
     [Google Scholar]
  162. NematollahiH. Sarraf ShiraziA. MehrabkhaniM. SabbaghS. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of laser pulpotomy in vital primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.201819420522010.1007/s40368‑018‑0358‑4 30019125
     [Google Scholar]
  163. PanchalV. ErulappanS.M.G. ErulappanS.M. Comparison between the effectiveness of rotary and manual instrumentation in primary teeth: A systematic review.Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201912434034610.5005/jp‑journals‑10005‑1637 31866721
     [Google Scholar]
  164. ParadisoD. TullioA. BensiC. Working length determination in primary teeth pulpectomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Aust. Endod. J.202349244445410.1111/aej.12652 35770609
     [Google Scholar]
  165. ParkJ.S. JasaniB. PatelJ. AnthonappaR.P. KingN.M. Efficacy of alternative medicaments for pulp treatment in primary teeth in the short term: A meta-analysis.J. Evid. Based Dent. Pract.201919410130910.1016/j.jebdp.2019.01.005 31843186
     [Google Scholar]
  166. PedrottiD. BotteziniP.A. CasagrandeL. BragaM.M. LenziT.L. Root canal filling materials for endodontic treatment of necrotic primary teeth: A network meta-analysis.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202324215116610.1007/s40368‑022‑00766‑y 36422832
     [Google Scholar]
  167. PengL. YeL. TanH. ZhouX. Evaluation of the formocresol] versus mineral trioxide aggregate primary molar pulpotomy: A meta-analysis.Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod.20061026e40e4410.1016/j.tripleo.2006.05.017 17138165
     [Google Scholar]
  168. PengL. YeL. GuoX. Evaluation of formocresol versus ferric sulphate primary molar pulpotomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. Endod. J.2007401075175710.1111/j.1365‑2591.2007.01288.x 17714467
     [Google Scholar]
  169. Pozos-GuillenA. Garcia-FloresA. Esparza-VillalpandoV. Garrocho-RangelA. Intracanal irrigants for pulpectomy in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201626641242510.1111/ipd.12228 26898157
     [Google Scholar]
  170. RhaiemM. ElelmiY. BaazizA. ChattiM. MaatoukF. GhediraH. Alternative root canal filling materials to zinc oxide eugenol in primary teeth: A systematic review of the literature.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.202324553354710.1007/s40368‑023‑00839‑6 37803184
     [Google Scholar]
  171. SchwendickeF. BrouwerF. SchwendickeA. ParisS. Different materials for direct pulp capping: Systematic review and meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Clin. Oral Investig.20162061121113210.1007/s00784‑016‑1802‑7 27037567
     [Google Scholar]
  172. ShafaeeH. AlirezaieM. RangraziA. BardidehE. Comparison of the success rate of a bioactive dentin substitute with those of other root restoration materials in pulpotomy of primary teeth.J. Am. Dent. Assoc.2019150867668810.1016/j.adaj.2019.03.002 31202439
     [Google Scholar]
  173. AsgaryS. ShirvaniA. FazlyabM. MTA and ferric sulfate in pulpotomy outcomes of primary molars: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.20143911810.17796/jcpd.39.1.b454r616m2582373 25631717
     [Google Scholar]
  174. Simancas-PallaresM.A. Díaz-CaballeroA.J. Luna-RicardoL.M. Mineral trioxide aggregate in primary teeth pulpotomy. A systematic literature review.Med. Oral Patol. Oral Cir. Bucal2010156e942e94610.4317/medoral.15.e942 20526246
     [Google Scholar]
  175. Smaïl-FaugeronV. PorotA. Muller-BollaM. CoursonF. Indirect pulp capping versus pulpotomy for treating deep carious lesions approaching the pulp in primary teeth: A systematic review.Eur. J. Paediatr. Dent.2016172107112 27377108
     [Google Scholar]
  176. Smaïl-FaugeronV. GlennyA.M. CoursonF. DurieuxP. Muller-BollaM. Fron ChabouisH. Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth.Cochrane Libr.201820185CD00322010.1002/14651858.CD003220.pub3 29852056
     [Google Scholar]
  177. TirupathiS.P. KrishnaN. RajasekharS. NuvvulaS. Clinical efficacy of single-visit pulpectomy over multiple-visit pulpectomy in primary teeth: A systematic review.Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201912545345910.5005/jp‑journals‑10005‑1654 32440053
     [Google Scholar]
  178. VargheseN.S. JeevanandanG. Evaluation of the success of biodentine compared to mineral trioxide aggregate as pulp rehabilitation agents in primary dentition - A systematic review.J Reattach Ther Dev Divers202367s429440
     [Google Scholar]
  179. VitaliF.C. SantosP.S. CardosoM. Are electronic apex locators accurate in determining working length in primary teeth pulpectomies? A systematic review and meta‐analysis of clinical studies.Int. Endod. J.20225510989100910.1111/iej.13798 35808837
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cpr/10.2174/0115733963290288240813050512
Loading
Mapping Systematic Reviews on the Management of Dental Caries in Primary Teeth: A Meta-research
Curr Pediatr Rev 22, 25 (2026); https://doi.org/10.2174/0115733963290288240813050512
/content/journals/cpr/10.2174/0115733963290288240813050512
/content/journals/cpr/10.2174/0115733963290288240813050512
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

PRISMA checklist is available as supplementary material on the publisher’s website along with the published article.

file format download Download

  • Article Type:     Review Article
Keyword(s): Dental caries; evidence-based dentistry; GRADE approach; meta-research; methodological quality; pediatric dentistry; systematic reviews

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test