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.