Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Summary Review
  • Published:

Should we root treat children's first permanent molars?

Abstract

Study selection Medline via PubMed and Embase were searched on 6 November 2019 and all studies up to this date were included, including case reports and case series. This was noted as being due to the limited number of studies available in this research area. The outcome measured was clinical success, which was defined as the tooth being present and an assumption that it was sound and asymptomatic at the end of the study. Studies that did not include a minimum of six months' follow-up were excluded, as were editorial letters, in vitro studies and studies not reported in English.

Data extraction and synthesis One reviewer searched databases for appropriate studies, then a second reviewer assisted in assessing studies by title and abstract. For each eligible article the operator, sample size, and a full dental diagnosis were recorded. Treatment method, follow-up and treatment success were also assessed.

Results The systematic review included eleven studies. The GRADE approach was used to assess quality of evidence. Three studies were of high quality, six of low quality, and two of very low quality. Cochrane and Robins-I risk tools were used to assess bias. All randomised controlled trials were assessed to be of high risk of bias, due to the blinding process not being stated. Six non-randomised controlled trials were assessed to be of critical risk of bias, as the measurement of treatment outcomes was not stated. There was a high risk of bias determined overall.

The review reported a 90.5% (range 70-100%) success rate over a mean follow-up period of 28.4 months (range 6-73.6 months) for coronal pulpotomies, which is in line with the results from adult studies. For partial pulpotomies the review reported a 91.3% (range 78.5-100%) success rate over a mean follow-up period of 34.4 months (range 12-140 months), which is slightly lower than reported in adult studies.

Only one study on conventional pulpectomies was included in the review that reported a success rate of 36% for a small sample of patients (n = 10).

No studies on apexification of molar teeth were included in the review. Therefore, further evidence is required to assess the success of this therapy.

One case report showed success with regenerative endodontics for a single molar. Therefore, significant further evidence will be required to assess this approach.

Conclusion The systematic review ascertained that partial and coronal pulpotomies had successful treatment outcomes for treating compromised first permanent molar teeth.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Taylor G D, Vernazza C R, Abdulmohsen B. Success of endodontic management of compromised first permanent molars in children: A systematic review. Int J Paediatr Dent 2019; 00: 1-11.

  2. Alqaderi H, Lee C T, Borzangy S, Pagonis T C. Coronal pulpotomy for cariously exposed permanent posterior teeth with closed apices: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016; 44: 1-7.

  3. Ng Y L, Mann V, Rahbaran S, Lewsey J, Gulabivala K. Outcome of primary root canal treatment: systematic review of the literature - Part 2. Influence of clinical factors. Int Endod J 2008; 41: 6-31.

  4. Dhillon H K, Kaushik M, Sharma R. Regenerative endodontics - Creating new horizons. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2016; 104: 676-685.

  5. Ong D-V, Bleakley J. Compromised first permanent molars: an orthodontic perspective. Aust Dent J 2010; 55: 2-14.

  6. Chadwick B L, Pitts N B. Children's Dental Health Survey 2013. Report 2: Dental Disease and Damage in Children: England, Wales and Northern Ireland. London, UK: Health and Social Care Information Centre, 2015.

  7. Seow W K. Clinical diagnosis of enamel defects: pitfalls and practical guidelines. Int Dent J 1997; 47: 173-182.

  8. Cobourne M T, Williams A, Harrison M. National clinical guide lines for the extraction of first permanent molars in children. Br Dent J 2014; 217: 643-648.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Deery.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tajmehr, N., Graham, A. & Deery, C. Should we root treat children's first permanent molars?. Evid Based Dent 21, 142–143 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-020-0139-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-020-0139-x

Search

Quick links