Review
Abstract
Meja`re IA, Axelsson S, Davidson T, Frisk F, Hakeberg M,
Kvist T, Norlund A, Petersson A, Portenier I, Sandberg
H, Tranus S, Bergenholtz G. Diagnosis of the condition of
the dental pulp: a systematic review. International Endodontic
Journal, 45, 597613, 2012.
Introduction
An accurate diagnosis of the condition of the pulp in
teeth compromised by caries, dental procedures or
other forms of injury is crucial for arriving at a proper
Correspondence: Ingegerd Meja`re, SBU, Statens Beredning for
medicinsk Utvardering, PO Box 3657, 103 59 Stockholm,
Sweden (tel.: +46 84123242; e-mail address: mejare@sbu.se).
597
598
Data analysis
Measures used to assess diagnostic accuracy
The diagnostic accuracy (validity) of a test (index test)
requires a reference standard (reference test) for comparison. Such a reference standard should reflect the
true condition as closely as possible. For pulp, histological examination has often been used as the reference standard.
The relationship between positive and negative test
results and the presence or absence of diseased pulp can
be expressed as sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivity is
the number of true positive tests divided by the total
number of diseased pulps. Specificity is the number of
true negative tests divided by the total number of
healthy pulps. Other measures are predictive values
and likelihood ratios. The positive predictive value is
the number of true positive tests divided by the total
number of positive tests, and the negative predictive
value is the number of negative tests divided by the
total number of negative tests. Likelihood ratio combines sensitivity and specificity and states how many
Included articles
n = 18
n=0
n=2
n =16
Figure 1 Flow chart showing the search strategy, excluded and included articles and study quality of included articles.
Limited (ss): based on high- or moderatequality studies containing factors that weaken the
overall judgement.
Insufficient (sss): the evidence base is insufficient when scientific evidence is lacking, the quality
of available studies is low or studies of similar
quality are contradictory.
GRADE amounts to asking how much confidence
one can have in a particular estimate of effect. Is it built
on solid ground, or is it likely that new research
findings will change the evidence in the foreseeable
future? The rating starts at high, but confidence in the
evidence may be lowered for several reasons, including
limitations in study design and/or quality, inconsistency or indirectness of results, imprecision of estimates
and probability of publication bias.
Any disagreements about inclusion/exclusion criteria,
rating quality of individual studies or quality of evidence
of test methods were solved by consensus. A flow chart
showing the results of the literature search and the
outcome of the selection procedures is given in Fig. 1.
Results
Eighteen studies were included (Seltzer et al. 1963,
Guthrie et al. 1965, Eidelman et al. 1968, Hasler &
Mitchell 1970, Johnson et al. 1970, Koch & Nyborg
1970, Tyldesley & Mumford 1970, Garfunkel et al.
599
Outcome measures
Exclusion criteria
Study design
Population
Index test
Reference test
Outcome measures
Table 2 Criteria of high, moderate and low study quality, mainly according to QUADAS (Whiting et al. 2003)
High: small risk of bias
Study design either cross-sectional or prospective. A casecontrol design was not accepted,
because it usually overestimates diagnostic accuracy (Lijmer et al. 1999). Particular emphasis was put
on the following items:
Randomly or consecutively selected, adequately described patients involving a representative and
clinically relevant sample (QUADAS items 1, 2)
The index test should not form part of the reference standard (item 7)
The index test and the reference standard should each be interpreted without knowledge of the results
of the other (items 10, 11)
The tests should be described in sufficient detail to permit replication (items 8, 9)
Sample size in subgroups 30
Diagnostic accuracy presented as sensitivity and specificity
Moderate: moderate
risk of bias
600
601
602
Aim
Accuracy of
clinical markers
of saveable/
nonsaveable
pulps, and
vitality tests
Accuracy of
clinical markers
of treatable/
nontreatable
pulps
References
Dummer
et al. (1980)
Eidelman
et al. (1968)
Cross-sectional:
32 primary teeth in children
aged 612 years
Cross-sectional:
75 permanent teeth to be
extracted mainly because
of pain
Main results
Study
quality
Index test
Table 3 Main characteristics, results and quality rating of the 18 included studies on pulp diagnosis
Accuracy of
clinical markers
of pulp status
Garfunkel et al.
(1973)
Cross-sectional:
132 teeth with painful pulp
conditions in need of
endodontic therapy
Exclusion criteria: Teeth with
radiographic signs of apical
periodontitis, incomplete case
history, technical difficulties
(n = 23)
Cross-sectional:
Sample 1: 67 teeth in 55 patients
aged 835 years. Anterior teeth
subjected to dental trauma with
at least two signs of pulp
necrosis (loss of pulp
sensitivity, discoloration,
radiographic signs of
pathology)
Sample 2: 77 noninjured intact
teeth from the same or other
patients
Accuracy of
clinical markers
of pulp vitality
Evans et al.
(1999)
Georgopoulou &
Kerani (1989)
Aim
References
Table 3 (Continued).
Index test
Reference test
EPT:
Se = 0.94, Sp = 0.73
Cold:
Se = 1.0, Sp = 0.62
Heat:
Se = 1.0, Sp = 0.66
Main results
Low
Low
Low
Study
quality
603
604
Aim
Index test
Reference test
References
Table 3 (Continued).
Pulse oximetry:
Se = 1.0, Sp = 0.95
PPV = 0.95, NPV = 1.0
Cold:
Se = 0.81, Sp = 0.92
PPV = 0.92, NPV = 0.81
EPT:
Se = 0.71, Sp = 0.92
PPV = 0.91, NPV = 0.74
Hemogram:a
Se (total pulpitis) = 0.36, Sp = 0.64
Profuse bleeding:
Se (total pulpitis) = 0.40, Sp = 0.89
History of spontaneous pain:
Se (total pulpitis) = 0.63, Sp = 0.79
Main results
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Study
quality
Aim
Accuracy of
clinical markers
of pulp status
and EPT in
diagnosis of
pulp
hyperaemia,
irreversible
pulpitis,
pulp necrosis
Accuracy of
clinical markers
of vital and
necrotic pulp
Significance of
clinical markers
in differential
diagnosis of
pulpitis, apical
periodontitis
(AP), marginal
periodontitis
(MP)
References
Johnson et al.
(1970)
Kamburoglu &
Paksoy (2005)
Klausen et al.
(1985)
Table 3 (Continued).
Reference test
Index test
Significant correlation of hyperaemia
with sensitivity to heata
Cold:
Se (irreversible inflammation) = 0.35,
Sp = 0.49
Heat:
Se (irreversible inflammation) = 0.59,
Sp = 0.39
EPT:
Se (pulp necrosis) = 0.57, Sp = 0.99
Main results
Sensibility to probing:
Se (necrotic) = 1.0, Sp = 0.76
Sensibility on caries removal:
Se (necrotic) = 1.0, Sp = 1.0
EPT
Se (necrotic) = 0.84, Sp = 0.96
Cold:
Se (necrotic) = 0.93, Sp = 0.98
Percussion:
Se (necrotic) = 0.19, Sp = 0.81
Widened lamina dura:
Se (necrotic) = 1.0, Sp = 0.80
Cross-sectional:
Markers of pulp status:
Visual examination and
Combined signs and symptoms,
74 patients with acute dental
Ability to point out tooth
probing of exposed pulp
that is, constant pain, tenderness
pain
Interference with sleep
Classification:
to temperature changes, tooth feels
Exclusion criterion: Patients with Constant pain
vital or necrotic pulp
extruded, impaired mouth opening,
dubious or mixed diagnosis
Tenderness to temperature radiography: normal or apical
tenderness to palpation in apical
changes and chewing
rarefaction, marginal bone loss. region and mobility discriminated
Tooth feels extruded
Marginal periodontium: normal between diagnoses in 82% of the
Impaired mouth opening. or deepened pocket
cases
Reddening of the apical oral Disease prevalence:
No or limited differential diagnostic
mucosa
1. Pulpitis 38%
value of pain to sweet and sour,
Tenderness at apex,
2. AP 41%
character or duration of pain, fever,
percussion, digital pressure 3. MP 12%
colour of tooth, tenderness to
Tooth mobility
4. Pulpo-periodontitis 9%
percussion, swelling of regional
Swollen regional lymph
(excluded from analysis)
lymph node, patient ability to point
nodes
out tooth
Cross-sectional:
93 teeth in 97 patients aged
1565 years (mean 33 years) in
need of endodontic therapy
because of caries
Comparison group: Adjacent or
contra-lateral sound teeth
(n = 49)
Cross-sectional:
706 extracted teeth in 94
consecutive patients because
of full-mouth extraction or be
cause of caries, tooth ache,
marginal periodontitis, and
prosthodontics
361 teeth pulp vitality tested
Low
Low
Low
Study
quality
605
606
Olgart et al.
(1988)
Matsuo et al.
(1996)
Accuracy of
Cross-sectional:
Markers of pulp status:
clinical markers 48 painful primary lower molars Frequency and duration of
of pulp status in
tooth ache
deciduous teeth
Character of bleeding at pulp
with deep caries
exposure
Thermal sensitivity
Tenderness to percussion
and pressure
Gingival swelling and fistula
Radiographic findings
Significance of
Prospective cohort:
Markers of pulp status:
clinical markers 44 teeth in 38 patients
History of pain
(age 2069 years) with
Heat, cold and
as predictors of
carious exposure and
percussion test
the outcome of
pulp capping
without extensive pain
Colour, hardness of dentin
Exclusion criteria:
surrounding pulp exposure
Severe damage to the pulp
Pulp exposure size
during caries excavation
Bleeding character
(n = 3)
Vitality tests:
EPT (Dentotest)
Cold (ethyl chloride,
temporary stopping)
Percussion
Accuracy of Laser Cross-sectional/longitudinal
Markers of pulp status:
Doppler
study
Vitality test:
flowmetry (LDF) Sample 1: 33 teeth in 25
Laser Doppler flowmetry
in diagnosis of
patients aged 720 years with
pulp vitality in
1 year history of injury from
traumatized
trauma scheduled for
young
endodontic
permanent
treatment
anterior teeth
Control: 33 noninjured teeth
Sample 2: 20 teeth in 18 patients
aged 716 years subjected to
moderate trauma and initially
nonsensitive to EPT
Index test
Aim
References
Table 3 (Continued).
Low
Low
Low
Study
quality
Main results
Reference test
Aim
Accuracy of pulp
vitality test
methods
Correlation of
clinical markers
of pulp status
and tests with
histological
status of pulp
References
Petersson et al.
(1999)
Seltzer et al.
(1963)
Table 3 (Continued).
Cross-sectional
Sample 1:
59 teeth in 56 patients
(2179 years) scheduled for
endodontic treatment.
Sample 2: (controls): 16
teeth in nine
dental students with intact
teeth
Cross-sectional:
166 teeth scheduled for
extraction because of tooth
ache, orthodontic, periodontal
or prosthetic reasons
Histology of pulp
after extraction
Classification:
a. Intact uninflamed (n = 23)
b. Atrophic (n = 40)
c. Intact with scattered
inflammatory cells (n = 19)
d. Chronic partial pulpitis with
partial necrosis (n = 24)
e. Chronic total pulpitis with
partial necrosis (n = 14)
f. Chronic total pulpitis (n = 22)
g. Total necrosis (n = 22)
Dichotomized in
ad = nonsuppurative (n = 106)
and
eg = suppurative (n = 60)
Disease prevalence:
Total pulpitis/necrosis
(eg): 35%
Reference test
Index test
EPT:
Se (nonvital) = 0.72, Sp = 0.90
Cold:
Se (nonvital) = 0.83, Sp = 0.90
Heat:
Se (nonvital) = 0.86, Sp = 0.57
Main results
Low
Low
Study
quality
607
608
Reference test
Index test
Cross-sectional:
150 patients (1876 years)
undergoing endodontic
treatment. One tooth per
patient
Weisleder et al.
(2009)
Diagnostic
accuracy of EPT
and two cold
tests, separately
and combined as
indicators of
pulp vitality
Cross-sectional:
142 teeth scheduled for
extraction because of
toothache
Aim
Tyldesley &
Accuracy of
Mumford (1970) clinical markers
as indicators of
pulp status
References
Table 3 (Continued).
Study
quality
Low
Localized (ab) versus generalized
pulpitis/necrosis(cd):a
Mild versus severe pain:
Se (cd) = 0.68, Sp = 0.41
Intermittent versus constant pain:
Se (cd) = 0.37, Sp = 0.61
Cold:
Se (cd) = 0.92, Sp = 0.12
Heat:
Se (cd) = 0.92, Sp = 0.02
Percussion:
Se (cd) = 0.16, Sp = 0.93
Vital(ac) versus necrotic(d):
Cold:
Se (necrotic) = 0.94, Sp = 0.10
Heat:
Se (necrotic) = 0.89, Sp = 0.05
Percussion:
Se (necrotic) = 0.28, Sp = 0.89
EPT:
Low
Se (necrotic) = 0.75, Sp = 0. 92
Cold:
Endo-ice: Se (necrotic) = 0.92, Sp = 0.76
Carbon dioxide: Se (necrotic) = 0.89,
Sp = 0.76
All three test combined:
Se (necrotic) = 0.96, Sp = 0.92
Main results
Table 4 Quality of evidence of the diagnostic accuracy of abnormal reaction to heat, cold, percussion test and discontinuity of
dentin floor over the pulp for determining the status of vital pulp (no/minimal versus moderate/severe inflammation) in teeth with
deep caries. Data from Hasler & Mitchell (1970)
Test method
Sample size
(no of studies)
Sensitivity
(95% CI)
Specificity
(95% CI)
Quality of
evidence
Heat
47 (1)
54 (29;77)
21 (10;37)
sss
(insufficient)
Cold
47 (1)
85 (58;96)
12 (5;27)
sss
(insufficient)
Percussion
47 (1)
77 (50;92)
21 (10;37)
sss
(insufficient)
47 (1)
77 (50;92)
88 (73;95)
sss
(insufficient)
Rating according to
Study design/quality,
indirectness, consistency,
precision, publication bias
Study design/quality
Precision 1
One study 1
Study design/quality
Precision 1
One study 1
Study design/quality
Precision 1
One study 1
Study design/quality
Precision 1
One study 1
Table 5 Quality of evidence of the diagnostic accuracy of electric stimulation, pulse oximetry and cold test for determining pulp
vitality. Data from Gopikrishna et al. (2007)
Test method
Sample size
(no of studies)
Sensitivity
(95% CI)
Specificity
(95% CI)
Quality of
evidence
Electric stimulation
80 (1)
71 (56;83)
92 (79;97)
sss
(insufficient)
Pulse oximetry
80 (1)
100 (91;100)
95 (83;99)
sss
(insufficient)
Cold
80 (1)
81 (67;90)
92 (79;97)
sss
(insufficient)
609
To conclude, there is insufficient evidence to determine the diagnostic accuracy of tests used to assess
pulp vitality (Table 5).
Discussion
The literature targeting the problem field addressed in
this systematic review is extensive. However, most of
the publications consist of narrative overviews describing methods, techniques and materials for the clinical
evaluation of the condition of pulp. In contrast, only a
few studies were designed for assessing the accuracy of
tests or methods. No systematic review that has
critically evaluated the scientific literature corresponding to the research questions could be identified. It is
worth noting that most of the included studies in the
current review are out of date and relatively few have
assessed novel test methods in a clinical context.
A conceivable explanation for the lack of highquality studies could be the difficulty in obtaining a
good reference test. Dental pulp tissue is normally not
available for direct inspection or for microscopic or
other examinations, especially if the tooth is healthy
and in no need of endodontic treatment or extraction.
Formerly, such teeth were frequently available as they
were extracted if decayed by caries rather than being
treated endodontically. Healthy teeth were also often
sacrificed for prosthodontic reasons. Today, access to
such teeth is highly limited. Another explanation for
the lack of studies of good quality may be that crosssectional data have traditionally been regarded as the
only means, whilst the benefit of a prospective study
design has not been considered. Only one of the
included studies used this design (Matsuo et al. 1996).
610
Yes
Unclear
No
100
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% %
Representative patient spectrum
Population adequately described
Reference test classifies the target condition correctly
Time interval between index- and reference test adequate
Reference test applied on all or on a randomized sample of patients
The same reference test irrespective of results of index test
Index test adequately described
Reference test adequately described
Index test interpreted without knowledge of results of reference test
Reference test interpreted without knowledge of results of index test
Uninterpretable test results reported
At least two independent examiners of reference test
Figure 2 Reporting of 14 quality criteria, modified after QUADAS (Whiting et al. 2003), of the 18 included studies regarding
accuracy of pulp diagnosis. Percentage distribution of yes/unclear/no of each criterion.
611
about what distinguishes a treatable from a nontreatable pulpal inflammation in teeth subjected to deep
caries, trauma or other injury. Future research should
focus on exploring methods that can disclose whether a
vital but injured pulp can be maintained, or whether it
should be removed and replaced with a root filling.
Furthermore, the long-term benefit to the patient,
which is the ultimate goal of any diagnostic procedure,
should be evaluated.
Conclusion
The scientific evidence is insufficient (sss) to assess
the accuracy of the following clinical signs, symptoms
or tests used to determine the condition of pulp:
hypersensibility to heat, response to cold, electric
stimulation or tenderness to percussion in asymptomatic teeth with deep caries lesions,
presence, character or duration of pain and
in terms of reversible/irreversible pulp inflammation.
The evidence base is also insufficient (sss) to assess
the accuracy of the following:
combining tests to determine the condition of pulp,
electrical or thermal pulp testing or methods for
measuring pulpal blood circulation to determine
whether the pulp is vital or nonvital and
biological markers of pulp inflammation, infection
or other tissue damage for predicting the outcome of
treatment intended to maintain an exposed pulp
vital and asymptomatic.
Conflict of interest
There were no conflicts of interest.
References
Begg CB (1987) Biases in the assessment of diagnostic tests.
Statistics in Medicine 6, 41123.
Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al. (2003) Towards
complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic
accuracy: the STARD initiative. British Medical Journal 326,
414.
Bowles WR, Withrow JC, Lepinski AM, Hargreaves KM (2003)
Tissue levels of immunoreactive substance P are increased
in patients with irreversible pulpitis. Journal of Endodontics
29, 2657.
Cohen JS, Reader A, Fertel R, Beck M, Meyers WJ (1985) A
radioimmunoassay determination of the concentrations of
prostaglandins E2 and F2alpha in painful and asymptomatic
human dental pulps. Journal of Endodontics 11, 3305.
612
Supporting information
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the
online version of this article:
Appendix S1. Search terms for diagnosing the
condition of dental pulp in three databases: PUBMED
(NLM), EMBASE.COM (ELSEVIER) and COCHRANE
CENTRAL REGISTRY OF CONTROLLED TRIALS (WILEY).
Appendix S2. Excluded articles.
Please note: Wiley-Blackwell are not responsible for
the content or functionality of any supporting materials
supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than
missing material) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
613