Comparative Meta-Analysis of Minimally Invasive and Conventional Approaches for Caries Removal in Permanent Dentition.

Background and Objectives: Addressing deep carious lesions poses significant challenges in daily dental practice due to the inherent complexity of their treatment. Traditionally, complete removal of carious tissues has been the norm, potentially leading to pulp tissue exposure and subsequent pulpitis. In contemporary dentistry, there is a growing preference for minimally invasive techniques, such as selective removal, offering a more conservative approach with enhanced predictability and success rates. Materials and Methods: Our study commenced with a comprehensive systematic review. After that, we performed a meta-analysis focused exclusively on randomized controlled trials involving permanent dentition. Our investigation incorporated seven selected articles, which scrutinized success rates and the incidence of pulp exposure in minimally invasive techniques (MIT) versus conventional techniques (CT). Statistical analysis employed U Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon tests to interpret the results. Results: Although the difference did not reach statistical significance, MIT demonstrated marginally superior success rates compared to CT. Furthermore, MIT exhibited a lower percentage of pulp exposure when contrasted with CT. However, due to the limited sample size, statistical significance for this difference could not be established. Conclusions: Minimally invasive techniques for caries removal emerge as a conservative and promising approach to safeguard pulp tissues in comparison to conventional techniques. The need for additional randomized controlled trials is emphasized to unequivocally establish the superior success rates of these procedures over their conventional counterparts.