Pulpotomy, an often-overlooked vital pulp therapy procedure, has now re-emerged as a minimally invasive, biologically based treatment option for teeth diagnosed with pulpitis and involves partial/ complete removal of coronal pulp tissue, following which a biocompatible material is placed onto the pulp tissue to promote healing 6. Specifically, it was seldom used as a definitive treatment modality in teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis based on diagnostic modalities that predominantly serve to assess neuronal function as a measure of pulpal health 32. However, with recent advances in newer biocompatible, anti-inflammatory and osteo-inductive biomaterials, the face of VPT has evolved 32. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the outcome of pulpotomy in teeth with irreversible pulpits using available clinical data. Our study demonstrates pulpotomy to be a successful intervention for teeth with irreversible pulpitis with a favorable outcome of 86%. Our results substantiate the findings by Cushley et al, wherein successful outcomes were demonstrated in 88% of cases at 3-years 12. Additionally, the present study computed success rates using meta-analytical methods to include relative weight of each study and allows for random variation in the success rate among studies. The present study also performed a comprehensive assessment of risk factors on the outcome of clinical success. Our results of this subset analyses evaluated the following variables/risk factors: teeth diagnosed with symptomatic versus asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis, teeth with mature (closed) versus immature (open) root apex, and choice of pulp capping material used.
Based on the clinical presentation and diagnostic testing, irreversible pulpitis is classified as symptomatic or asymptomatic 3. In symptomatic cases, pulpotomy has traditionally been used as an emergency procedure to relieve pain 33. In addition, presence of acute preoperative symptoms is typically regarded as a negative outcome predictor for long-term success of VPT 34, thereby precluding application of pulpotomy as a definitive treatment modality. However, in this meta-analysis, we demonstrate a success rate of 84% of pulpotomy in teeth with SIP, which was not significantly different from the outcome observed in teeth with asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis. This favorable outcome in symptomatic irreversible pulpitis can be attributed to the fact that pulpotomy procedures regulate immune responses and can reduce levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines within the dental pulp 35. In addition, histologic studies have demonstrated that in teeth with irreversible pulpitis, the damage and inflammation was mostly confined to only a portion of the coronal pulp, with the rest of the coronal and radicular pulp being intact and healthy 4. Furthermore, anti-inflammatory properties of new generation tricalcium silicate materials promote reversal of residual inflammation and maintenance of a healthy pulp tissue thereafter 36. Collectively, these above mentioned reasons suggest that the removal of the coronally inflamed pulp might be sufficient to maintain viability and health of the radicular pulp, making pulpotomy an effective emergency procedure as well as a definitive treatment modality in this subset of patient population.
Traditional VPT procedures were aimed at promoting continued root development (apexogenesis) 37. Therefore, clinically, teeth with fully formed apices (closed apex) were excluded from VPT case selection. However, with the growing knowledge about the repair potential of the dental pulp 38, VPT such as pulpotomy protocols have been introduced to treat teeth with closed apex with a diagnosis of irreversible pulpitis 12. The results from this meta-analysis demonstrate that pulpotomy in teeth with closed apex yields a cumulative success rate of 83%. In contrast, teeth with open apex demonstrated a significantly favorable outcome. This can be attributed to the increased vascularity and cellularity of pulp in immature teeth 39. In addition, aging of dental pulp is associated with reduced regenerative potential of dental stem cells 40. However, with a success rate of 83% in mature teeth with irreversible pulpitis, pulpotomy should be considered a viable and definitive treatment approach in these cases. These results are in accordance with the findings demonstrated by Tan et al 34 and Kunert et al 41, wherein favorable success rates were reported for both young immature as well as mature teeth.
Pulp capping agents can affect the outcome of pulpotomy procedures 37. Traditionally, calcium hydroxide has been the most popular pulp capping agent, owing to its antimicrobial nature and the capability to form a hard tissue barrier; however, issues such as high solubility, lower mechanical resistance and presence of tunnel defects in the mineralized barrier were reported as concerns especially for vital pulp therapy procedures 42. Tricalcium silicate-based materials such as MTA and alike have now become the material of choice for pulpotomy because of several added advantages such as biocompatibility, reduced microleakage, ability to induce a thicker dentinal bridge with fewer defects and ability to release growth factors from dentin 36,41. MTA as a pulp capping material has few disadvantages such as its potential to discolor tooth and high solubility owing to the slow setting reaction 43. Other bioceramic materials such as Biodentine and CEM have been introduced to overcome these shortcomings of MTA. In contrast to MTA, Biodentine has been demonstrated to cause lesser tooth discoloration 44. Calcium enriched mixture (CEM) is another bioceramic material introduced in 2006 with properties similar to MTA, however with better physical characteristics and shorter setting time 45. We therefore wanted to evaluate the success rate of pulpotomy in teeth with irreversible pulpitis based on the types of biomaterial used. In our meta-analysis, Biodentine demonstrated to be superior to other pulp capping materials, in terms of success rate for pulpotomy. This finding might be attributed to the ability of biodentine to cause a greater release of calcium ions and bioactive growth factors 46. MTA was found to be superior to calcium hydroxide, which corroborates the results from study done by Li Y et al 32. Interestingly, CEM and calcium hydroxide demonstrated similar success rates. Collectively, these data suggest that use of bioceramic pulp capping materials such as MTA and Biodentine can lead to more favorable clinical outcomes in teeth with irreversible pulpitis.
From a clinical and research point of view, there are several factors in vital pulp therapy, which still need to be standardized. There is a lack of agreement regarding the indications for pulpotomy procedures 47. This is partly attributable to the diagnostic ambiguity of our current pulp testing methods to establish the true inflammatory status of pulp 38. As for the choice of type of pulpotomy, there is some evidence that full pulpotomy is more successful than partial pulpotomy especially in cases with irreversible pulpitis 9. Interestingly, most of the included studies in our meta-analysis employed full coronal pulpotomy 7,23,24,26−31, therefore a subset analysis based on type of pulpotomy was not performed. Traditionally, a minimum of 3–6 months follow up time has been established to determine the prognosis of a vital pulp therapy procedure 48–50. This follow up time point interval is critical, as majority of the early failures present during this period and it has been demonstrated that pain or symptoms during the first 3 months after VPT are associated with poor outcomes 48. Accordingly, studies with at least a 6-month follow up period were included in this meta-analysis 7,22−31. These included studies had intra- and inter- study variation in patient recruitment which led to a wide range of follow up periods. In addition, only select studies reported on long term outcomes (> 2 years) of VPT procedures 7,22,26,27,30. As a result, data was not analyzed based on specific follow up time intervals.
Our study has several limitations and should be interpreted with caution. One of the limitations was the considerable heterogeneity across the included studies 7,22−31This heterogeneity could be attributed to multiple factors such as variation in study design, patient selection, type of pulpotomy, choice of biomaterial, and follow up period, to mention a few. However, we explored the reasons for heterogeneity in our meta-analysis by performing subgroup analysis. No heterogeneity was reported when analysis was restricted to immature teeth and asymptomatic teeth subgroups. None of the other studied variables could resolve the observed heterogeneity in the meta-analysis.
There are several confounding moderators, which need to be taken into account and should be consistently reported in future vital pulp therapy research. These include patient and tooth specific factors (such as age, gender, tooth type), operator factors (investigator specialty and experience), technical factors (type of pulpotomy, details of hemostatic agent used and time for hemostasis, choice of biomaterial and permanent restoration) and data from recall appointments. Having these factors reported in future studies will help other researchers and clinicians to understand the outcomes better and will also improve the applicability and generalizability of the results.