Comparison of Two Aerosol-Free Caries Removal Methods - A Split Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

The management of deep caries lesions in immature permanent molars can be challenging in clinical practice, but minimally invasive caries removal methods can maintain apexogenesis by preventing extensive tissue loss. Here we compare a chemo-mechanical caries removal (CMCR) gel and polymer bur in terms of time spent on caries removal, patient acceptability, and clinical success. Materials and Methods:The teeth of 30 children were randomly divided into two groups. The duration of each method, the level of cooperation during each method, and the child's choice of caries removal method were recorded. Patients were followed at six-month intervals for at least two years. Results:The difference between the patients' preferences was not statistically significant, while the average caries removal time of the polymer bur method was significantly shorter (p<0.05) than the CMCR method. The rates of apical closure without pathology in the CMCR and polymer bur groups were 63.2% and 73.7%, respectively; 10% of each group underwent further treatment due to their clinical and/or radiographic pathology.Conclusions: These methods were thought to serve as an interim treatment in managing immature permanent teeth with deep caries. Furthermore, these methods, which do not involve water cooling, can minimize the risk of contamination and cross-infection.