Success rate of permanent teeth pulpotomy using bioactive materials: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials

Abstract Background The results of vital pulp treatments in permanent teeth have been encouraging. Currently, pulpotomy treatment for permanent teeth primarily utilizes mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) as the dressing material, followed by calcium hydroxide. While other calcium‐silicate‐based cements have been suggested for pulpotomy, there is a limited number of studies evaluating their long‐term effectiveness. Objectives The objective of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to evaluate the success rate of pulpotomies performed on permanent teeth, comparing the use of ProRoot MTA with that of calcium hydroxide and other bioceramic materials. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted in several electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase and Science Direct until December 2022. The search was guided by PICOS criteria, including only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the success rate of pulpotomy treatments in permanent teeth using ProRoot MTA in comparison to calcium hydroxide and other bioceramic materials. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the RoB‐2 tool to evaluate the risk of bias, and relevant data were extracted and analysed in RevMan software 5.3 using fixed‐effect models. The GRADE tool was used to determine the overall quality of evidence. Results The initial search retrieved 1072 studies and, after eliminating duplicates, 677 studies were screened and 28 studies were considered for eligibility. In the final selection process, 16 studies were included in the systematic review, with 10 being determined as having a high risk of bias. Pulpotomy showed an overall mean success rate of 92% after 1 year. The meta‐analysis indicated a significantly higher success rate for pulpotomies utilizing MTA in comparison with calcium hydroxide, while no significant difference was seen between MTA and calcium‐enriched mixture (CEM) or Biodentine. The GRADE assessment revealed an overall low level of evidence for the included studies. Discussion Most randomized controlled trials exhibited a significant absence of control over confounding factors. Conclusions This systematic review and meta‐analysis demonstrate that pulpotomy is a highly effective treatment for managing permanent teeth. The results indicate that the success rate of pulpotomy using ProRoot MTA is significantly higher than when using calcium hydroxide. However, the certainty of evidence supporting these findings is low, and there is a need for well‐designed RCTs to assess the long‐term outcomes of pulpotomy using newer bioceramic materials. Registration This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number CRD42023393970).