Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2026
Development of a Direct Pulp-capping Model for the Evaluation of Pulpal Wound Healing and Reparative Dentin Formation in Mice
Published on: January 12, 2017
Pulpal calcification: A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating differences among repair materials and the
Victor Santos Dos Santos1, Patrícia Maria Poli Kopper1, Rafaella Ronchi Zinelli1
1Graduate Program, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Background:
Vital pulpal therapy (VPT) failure associated with pulpal calcifications (PCs) may represent technical challenges for root canal treatment. The authors aimed to assess the PC rate after VPT using different repair materials (RMs) and to verify the association between PC and treatment success.
Types Of Studies Reviewed:
Six databases were searched for studies published from inception through May 1, 2025. The PC rate using different RMs and the association between PC and VPT success were collected for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Meta-analyses were performed to verify differences in PCs according to the RMs and to compare success rates according to the presence of PCs. Using Version 2 of the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions, Version 2, the authors assessed the risk of bias for randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized intervention studies, respectively. The authors assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
Results:
Forty-two studies were selected for qualitative synthesis and 37 were selected for meta-analysis. PCs occurred in 8.80% of the teeth, with a 96.77% success rate in obliterated canals. PC was not associated with VPT success (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.43 to 2.38). No significant differences were found in PC rates of mineral trioxide aggregate compared with other RMs (odds ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.84 to 4.33). Risk of bias was moderate to low in randomized clinical trials and moderate in nonrandomized intervention studies. The certainty of the evidence was high for the comparison of RMs and very low for the impact of PCs on VPT success.
Conclusions And Practical Implications:
After VPT, the PC rate was low and comparable among RMs. PC does not influence VPT success. Therefore, VPT contraindication due to the risk of developing a failure associated with PC cannot be considered an evidence-based practice.
