Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Vital Pulp Therapy Using Resin-Modified Versus Conventional Calcium Silicate-Based Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Vital pulp therapy (VPT) is increasingly recognised as a biologically driven alternative to root canal treatment in teeth with deep caries and a vital pulp diagnosis. Resin-modified calcium silicate-based materials (RM-CSMs) were introduced to combine the bioactivity of traditional cements with impr...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2026 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Sevilla (US) |
| Repositorio: | idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:idus.us.es:11441/180762 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/11441/180762 https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb17010032 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Vital pulp therapy Resin-modified calcium silicate-based materials TheraCal LC TheraCal PT Meta-analysis Dentine bridge formation |
| Sumario: | Vital pulp therapy (VPT) is increasingly recognised as a biologically driven alternative to root canal treatment in teeth with deep caries and a vital pulp diagnosis. Resin-modified calcium silicate-based materials (RM-CSMs) were introduced to combine the bioactivity of traditional cements with improved handling and immediate light-curing, but their biological performance remains debated. Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of VPT performed with RM-CSMs compared with conventional non-resin-modified calcium silicate-based materials (NRM-CSMs) Methods: PRISMA Guidelines were followed to carry out this systematic review. Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched up to October 2025 for randomised clinical trials evaluating indirect pulp capping, direct pulp capping, or pulpotomy. Nine trials met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were performed for TheraCal LC, the only RM-CSM with sufficient clinical evidence. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 Tool. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Results: Pooled results showed no significant differences in overall clinical–radiographic success between RM-CSMs and NRM-CSMs at 90 or 180 days. At 360 days, a trend favouring NRM-CSMs emerged, though not statistically significant. Dentine bridge formation at 360 days was significantly lower with TheraCal LC. Conclusions: Current RM-CSMs demonstrate comparable short-term success to conventional materials but still present biological limitations, particularly regarding long-term reparative outcomes. NRM-CSMs remain the preferred option when maximal bioactivity and predictable dentinogenesis are required. |
|---|