ArticleBDJ open2024
Recommended procedures for managing carious lesions in primary teeth with pulp involvement-a scoping review.
Article in BDJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- How do clinicians treat irreversibly inflamed and necrotic primary molars? A worldwide survey of decision-making and practice.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Article
- A long-term retrospective evaluation of pulpectomy and calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste resorption in primary teeth managed under dental general anaesthesia.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Antimicrobial Efficacy and Cytotoxicity of Zinc Oxide withInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Diagnosis to Follow-Up: Practice Variability and Evidence-Based Gaps In Vital Pulp Therapy Among Saudi Dentists.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2025Article
- Review
- Comparative evaluation of step-wise caries excavation and indirect pulp capping for vitality preservation in young permanent teeth: AnBioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManaging dental caries in primary teeth with pulp involvement is a significant challenge. Clinical guidelines offer recommendations for effective management.
aimTo identify and analyze policies, guidelines, and recommendations for treating primary teeth with pulp-involved carious lesions, highlighting existing research gaps and setting the foundation for future research.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted across databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, GIN, and LILACS) and grey literature sources (Trip and ProQuest) to identify guidelines, consensus, policy, and position statements on primary teeth pulp therapy and extraction thresholds. Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts and titles, followed by full-text screening.
resultsAfter removing duplication, of the 1098 records, 14 were selected for analysis. This review examined various treatments for deep caries lesions in primary teeth, including indirect/direct pulp capping, pulpotomy, pulpectomy, lesion sterilization/tissue restoration, and extraction. Time search was restricted to documents published from 30th January 2008 to 30th January 2024, offering insights into evolving clinical practices.
conclusionTreatment for carious lesions in primary teeth involving the pulp depends on clinical indications and may involve minimally invasive techniques. Recommended options are indirect pulp capping, pulpotomy, and pulpectomy, while direct capping and tooth removal are discouraged. Further research is needed to address gaps, improve guideline development, and enhance consistency of recommendations.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.