Caries removal strategies for deep carious lesions in primary teeth: Systematic review

The study aimed to compare the efficacy of three caries removal techniques—complete caries removal (CCR), selective caries removal (SCR), and stepwise caries removal (SWR)—for deep carious lesions in vital temporary teeth by conducting a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Electronic databases (PubMed [MEDLINE], Cochrane Library, EMBASE) were searched for corresponding references up to 31 May 2019. Possible outcomes were pulp exposure, pulpo‐periodontal complications, or restorative failures. Three reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using RoB 2. Meta‐analyses for intention‐to‐treat and per‐protocol scenarios were performed using Revman5. Of 1374 potentially eligible articles, ten relevant references corresponding to eight studies were included. Pooled results showed decreased risk of pulp exposure after SCR (OR: 0.10, 95% CI [0.04, 0.25]) or SWR (OR: 0.20, 95% CI [0.09, 0.44]), compared with CCR. There was a higher risk of composite restorative failure (OR: 2.61, 95% CI [1.05, 6.49]) using USPHS criteria, after SCR compared with CCR only in intention‐to‐treat analysis. Risk of clinical or radiographic failure of pulpo‐periodontal complications was unchanged when compared with SCR and CCR or SWR. SCR and SWR may result in lower pulp exposure risk than CCR. RCTs with lower risk of bias, higher power, and longer follow‐up are required to choose between these three caries removal techniques for deep carious lesions in vital temporary teeth.