Chemomechanical caries removal method versus mechanical caries removal methods in clinical and community-based setting: A comparative in vivo study

Kumar, KR; Prasad, Madu Ghanashyam; Sandeep, R; Reddy, Suravarapu Pavani; Divya, D; Pratyusha, K.

doi:10.4103/1305-7456.184151

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the literature, the clinical application of Brix3000™ has been reported only in comparison with rotary instruments (Alkhouli et al 2020;Vila-Sierra et al 2019), but conventional methods of caries tissue removal are already associated with increased anxiety and fear in young patients. This occurs due to vibration and heat produced, which can migrate into the pulp, causing pain and a consequent negative experience (Kumar et al 2016). The ART technique, in contrast, is known as a method that reduces child discomfort (Leal .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment time, pain experience and acceptability of the technique for caries removal in primary teeth using the ART approach with or without Brix3000™ papain gel: a preliminary randomised controlled clinical trial

Souza

Martins

Tavares-Silva

et al. 2021

Eur Arch Paediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) associated with Brix3000™ to ART considering treatment time, pain experienced, and acceptability to children. Methods This study was accepted in Research Ethics Committee in July 2019 (number 3469402). Healthy patients ( n = 20) aged 3–9 years, with at least one primary molar with occlusal dentine caries without cusp involvement were randomly allocated to either the ART + Brix3000™ group or the ART-only group. The sample was characterised by sex, age, tooth location and caries experience. Time spent and pain experience scores were recorded at prophylaxis, caries removal and restoration. The pain experience (intense, moderate, or mild) was evaluated by the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability-revised scale (FLACC-r). Acceptability was assessed by a five-point hedonic facial scale (dichotomised into ‘like’ and ‘indifferent/dislike’ bins) and by an open-question interview. Mann–Whitney, Chi-square, and Fisher’s exact tests were applied to discern differences in time, pain/sample characterisation and acceptability, respectively. Results The ART + Brix3000™ group required 8.6 ± 3.1 min to remove caries tissue, whereas the ART group required only 4.8 ± 2.0 min ( p = 0.03). The total time spent with treatments was 13.1 ± 4.0 min for ART + Brix3000™, and 9.8 ± 2.7 min for ART ( p = 0.03). There was no difference in pain experience and acceptability found among the groups ( p > 0.05). Conclusion Although the ART + Brix3000™ technique demanded more treatment time than the ART alone, there were no differences in either pain experience or acceptability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment time, pain experience and acceptability of the technique for caries removal in primary teeth using the ART approach with or without Brix3000™ papain gel: a preliminary randomised controlled clinical trial

Souza

Martins

Tavares-Silva

et al. 2021

Eur Arch Paediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Santosh Kumar KVK[ 20 ] reported working time of 7 and 6.66 min by using Carie Care in dental clinic and field setting, respectively, while smart bur consumed 5.85 min, which was significantly less than the Carie Care technique.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of BRIX3000, CARIE CARE, and SMART BURS in caries excavation: An in vivo study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Chemomechanical caries removal has been a new leaf for caries excavation in this ultraconservative era of dentistry. BRIX3000 & Carie Care are papain based gel formulations while Smart Burs are polymer burs with self limiting ability. Aim: To compare & evaluate the caries excavation efficacy of BRIX3000, Carie Care & Smart burs. Materials & Methods: 45 patients with wide class 1 carious lesions were selected and equally divided into 3 groups: BRIX 3000, Carie Care & Smart Burs. Caries excavation was performed in accordance with manufacturer's instructions in each group & evaluation for reduction in bacterial count & mean working time was done. Statistical Analysis: Data was analysed by One way ANOVA, Paired t -Test & Tukey's Post Hoc test. Results: The highest reduction in bacterial count was achieved by BRIX3000(156.93 × 10 4 ) followed by Smart Burs(139.07× 10 4 )& Carie Care(135.80×10 4 ) with p>0.5. Mean working time in minutes for excavation was: BRIX3000(13.66), Carie Care(18.30) &Smart Burs(20.60) with p< 0.5. Conclusion: All the techniques reduced bacterial count potentially. BRIX 3000 proves the most effective among three.

show abstract

“…Yet, there was no statistically significant difference between preand post-treatment behaviors of the two groups. 19 Kumar et al 20 examined 80 baby molar teeth using the atraumatic restorative technique as well as chemomechanical caries removal methods, and reported that the chemo-mechanical method took a longer time, but it was more acceptable to pediatric patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Er:YAG lasers on pain perception in pediatric patients during caries removal: a split-mouth study

Korkut¹,

Gezgin²,

Özer³

et al. 2017

Acta Odontologica Turcica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE: Fear and anxiety is a major problem in the treatment of pediatric patients. The pain that occurs during the use of caries removal instruments has a strong potential of triggering dental anxiety and fear in most children and adults. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the pain perceptions of children who underwent caries removal via an Er:YAG laser and traditional rotary instruments. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Occlusal caries was removed from the permanent molar teeth of 120 pediatric patients who referred to the Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Necmettin Erbakan University, using an Er:YAG laser and high-and low-speed rotary instruments. All restorative procedures were performed by one clinician. The participant children were asked to choose a value or figure from the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale, and the data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test (α=0.05). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was found between the groups (p<0.05). In the Er:YAG laser group, 20.83% of the participants, and in the conventional group, 6.66% of the participants selected the option 'no hurt'. The option 'hurts worst' was selected in neither of the groups. CONCLUSION: The use of Er:YAG laser for caries removal causes less or no pain during the operations, compared to traditional rotary instruments. Therefore, it can be argued that Er:YAG laser is a more comfortable and acceptable alternative for pediatric patients.

show abstract

Chemomechanical caries removal method versus mechanical caries removal methods in clinical and community-based setting: A comparative in vivo study

Cited by 21 publications

References 12 publications

Treatment time, pain experience and acceptability of the technique for caries removal in primary teeth using the ART approach with or without Brix3000™ papain gel: a preliminary randomised controlled clinical trial

Treatment time, pain experience and acceptability of the technique for caries removal in primary teeth using the ART approach with or without Brix3000™ papain gel: a preliminary randomised controlled clinical trial

Comparative evaluation of BRIX3000, CARIE CARE, and SMART BURS in caries excavation: An in vivo study

Evaluation of Er:YAG lasers on pain perception in pediatric patients during caries removal: a split-mouth study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About