Search result: Three clinical trials with a laboratory component were found.
Clinical outcomes: There appears to be no difference in the pulp response between conventional GIC and CaOH-cement (CaOH is considered to be the gold standard in pulp treatment due to its high tissue supporting properties. Lack of difference between C-GIC and CaOH suggest high biocompatibility of C-GIC concerning pulp tissue).
[‘Preliminary Systematic Literature Searches’ are based on SYSTEM’s periodic systematic searches of the dental literature and provide first overviews over existing clinical evidence but are limited in the number of databases searched, as well as the assessment of precision and internal validity of results and thus do not replace the need for a full systematic review report to the topic]
Mickenautsch, S. (2019). Pulp response conventional GIC versus Calcium hydroxide (CaOH) cement [October 28, 2017]. Afribary. Retrieved from https://tracking.afribary.com/works/pulp-response-conventional-gic-versus-calcium-hydroxide-caoh-cement-october-28-2017
Mickenautsch, Steffen "Pulp response conventional GIC versus Calcium hydroxide (CaOH) cement [October 28, 2017]" Afribary. Afribary, 28 May. 2019, https://tracking.afribary.com/works/pulp-response-conventional-gic-versus-calcium-hydroxide-caoh-cement-october-28-2017. Accessed 18 Dec. 2024.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Pulp response conventional GIC versus Calcium hydroxide (CaOH) cement [October 28, 2017]". Afribary, Afribary, 28 May. 2019. Web. 18 Dec. 2024. < https://tracking.afribary.com/works/pulp-response-conventional-gic-versus-calcium-hydroxide-caoh-cement-october-28-2017 >.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Pulp response conventional GIC versus Calcium hydroxide (CaOH) cement [October 28, 2017]" Afribary (2019). Accessed December 18, 2024. https://tracking.afribary.com/works/pulp-response-conventional-gic-versus-calcium-hydroxide-caoh-cement-october-28-2017