Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical and mechanical caries removal: status of the restorations at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, the clinical efficacy of Carisolv™ system and the hand excavation method in the removal of occlusal dentine caries of primary molar teeth was evaluated. Both Carisolv system and hand excavation method were applied for the removal of caries on different teeth of the same children. After the removal of the caries, Dyract AP materials were used to restore the teeth. The clinical follow-up was made every 3 months within a year. The clinical evaluations of restorations were carried out in accordance with US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. To determine whether there was any statistical difference between the groups, chi-square analysis was used. During both excavation methods, pain occurrence and the need for anesthesia and the time spent were all recorded. The time spent for the removal of caries in Carisolv system and in hand excavation method was 9.03±4.14 min (mean±SD) and 7.34±3.41 min (mean±SD), respectively (P>0.05). At the end of 1 year, differences between Carisolv and hand excavation groups in terms of marginal adaptation and secondary caries were found to be statistically insignificant (P>0.05). During the removal of caries, certain children complained about pain both in Carisolv system and hand excavation method (7.1 and 35.7%, respectively). As a result, it can be argued that Carisolv system is effective in the removal of caries and causes minimum level pain occurrence. Compared to hand excavation, Carisolv system seems to be a promising restorative approach to remove occlusal caries in primary molar teeth. Studies of longer duration are needed to confirm these findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aboush YEY, Tarabzadeh H (1998) Fluoride releave from tooth-colored restorative materials: a 12-month report. J Can Dent Assoc 64:8

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ansari G, Beeley JA, Fung DF (2003) Chemomechanical caries removal in primary teeth in a group of anxious children. J Oral Rehabil 30:773–779

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Azrak B, Collaway A, GrundheberA, Stender E, Willershauser B (2004) Comparison of the efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal (Carisolv) with that of conventional excavation in reducing the cariogenic flora. Int J Paediatr Dent 14:182–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Banerjee A, Kidd EAM, Watson TF (2000) In vitro evaluation of five alternative methods of carious dentine excavation. Caries Res 34:144–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Banerjee A, Watson TF, Kidd EAM (2000) Dentin caries excavation: a review of current clinical techniques. Br Dent J 188:476–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bergmann J, Leitaod J, Kultje C, Bergmann D, Clode MJ (2005) Removing dentine caries in deciduous teeth with Carisolv: a randomised, controlled, prospective study with six-month follow-up, comparing chemomechanical treatment with drilling. Oral Health Prev Dent 3:105–111

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Björndal L, Larsen T, Thylstrup A (1997) A clinical and microbiological study of deep carious lesions during stepwise excavation using long treatment intervals. Caries Res 31:411–417

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cehreli ZC, Altay N (2000) Three-year clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite in minimally invasive occlusal cavities. J Dent 28:117–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chaussain-Miller C, Decup F, Domejean-Orliaguet S, Gillet D, Guigand M, Kaleka R et al (2003) Clinical evaluation of the Carisolv chemomechanical caries removal technique according to the site/stage concept, a revised caries classification system. Clin Oral Investig 7:32–37

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dahlin S (2001) Chemical mode of action of Carisolv. In: Albrektsson T, Bratthall D, Glantz PO, Lindhe J (eds) Tissue preservation in caries treatment. Quintessence, London, pp 167–175

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dammaschke T, Stratmann U, Mokrys K, Kaup M, Ott KHR (2002) Reaction of sound and demineralised dentine to Carisolv in vivo and in vitro. J Dent 30:59–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ericson D, Zimmerman M, Raber H, Götrick B, Bornstein R, Thorell J (1999) Clinical evaluation of efficacy and safety of a new method for chemo-mechanical removal of caries: a multi-centre study. Caries Res 33:171–177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ericson D, Bornstein R (2001) Development of a tissue-preserving agent for caries removal. In: Albrektsson T, Bratthall D, Glantz PO, Lindhe J (eds) Tissue preservation in caries treatment. Quintessence, London, pp 153–166

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fure S, Lingström P, Birkhed D (2000) Evaluation of Carisolv™ for the chemo-mechanical removal of primary root caries in vivo. Caries Res 34:275–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fure S, Lingström P (2004) Evaluation of the chemomechanical removal of dentine caries in vivo with a new modified Carisolv gel. Clin Oral Investig 8:139–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fusayama T (1997) The process and results of revolution in dental caries treatment. Int Dent J 47:157-166

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Frencken J, Makoni F (1994) A treatment technique for tooth decay in deprived communities. World Health 1:15–17

    Google Scholar 

  18. Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD (1996) Atraumatic restorative treatment and glass-ionomer sealants in school oral health programme in Zimbabwe: evaluation after 1 year. Caries Res 30:428–433

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gurbuz T, Yilmaz Y (2002) The effect of caries removal methods on microleakage in the primary molar teeth. Atatürk Univ Dent Fac J 12:22–28

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hannig M (1999) Effect of Carisolv™ solution on sound, demineralized and denatured dentin—an ultrastructural investigation. Clin Oral Investig 3:155–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kakaboura A, Masouras C, Staikou O, Vougiouklakis G (2003) A comparative clinical study on the Carisolv caries removal method. Quintessence Int 34:269–271

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Katz E (1988) A comparison of the efficacies of Caridex and conventional drills in caries removal. Compend Contin Educ Dent 9:804

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kavvadia K, Karagianni V, Polychronopoulou A, Papagiannouli L (2004) Primary teeth caries removal using the Carisolv chemomechanical method a clinical trial. Pediatr Dent 26:23–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kidd EA, Joyston-Bechal S, Beighton D (1993) The use of a caries detector dye during cavity preparation: a microbiological assessment. Br Dent J 174:245–248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mandari GJ, Truin GJ, van’t Hof MA, Frencken JE (2001) Effectiveness of three minimal intervention approaches for managing dental caries: Survival of restorations after 2 years. Caries Res 35:90–94

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Maragakis GM, Hahn P, Hellwig E (2001) Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical caries removal in primary molars and its acceptance by patients. Caries Res 35:205–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mjör IA, Gordan VV (1999) A review of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). Int Dent J 49:127–131

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mjor IA, Odont D (2001) Pulp-dentin biology in restorative dentistry. Part 2: initial reactions to preparation of teeth for restorative procedures. Quintessence Int 32:537–551

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Munshi AK, Hedge AM, Shetty PK (2001) Clinical evaluation of Carisolv in the chemico-mechanical removal of carious dentin. J Clin Pediatr Dent 26:49–54

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nadanovsky P, Carneiro FC, Mello de Souza F (2001) Removal of caries using only hand instruments: a comparison of mechanical and chemo-mechanical methods. Caries Res 35:384–389

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ohgushi K, Fusayama T (1975) Electron microscopic structure of the two layers of carious dentine. J Dent Res 54:1019–1026

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ryge G (1980) Clinical criteria. Int Dent J 30:347–358

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Siegel SC, von Fraunhofer JA (1998) Dental cutting: the historical development of diamond burs. J Am Dent Assoc 129:740–745

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Siegel SC, von Fraunhofer JA (1999) Dental cutting with diamond burs: heavy-handed or light-touch? J Prosthodont 8:3–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Schutzbank SG, Marchwinski M, Kronman JH, Goldman M, Clark RE (1975) In vitro study of the effect of GK 101 on the removal of carious material. J Dent Res 54:907

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Yip HK, Stevenson AG, Beeley JA (1994) The specificity of caries detector dyes in cavity preparation. Br Dent J 176:417–421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Yip HK, Samaranayake LP (1998) Caries removal techniques and instrumentation: a review. Clin Oral Investig 2:148–154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Yip HK, Smales RJ, Yu C, Gao XJ, Deng DM (2002) Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional cavity preparations for glass-ionomer restorations in primary molars: one-year results. Quintessence Int 33:17–21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pedodontics, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey

    Zuhal Kirzioglu

  2. Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pedodontics, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey

    Taskin Gurbuz & Yucel Yilmaz

  3. Dis Hekimligi Fakultesi, Pedodonti Ana Bilim Dali, Atatürk Universitesi, Erzurum, Turkey

    Taskin Gurbuz

Authors
  1. Zuhal Kirzioglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Taskin Gurbuz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yucel Yilmaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Taskin Gurbuz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kirzioglu, Z., Gurbuz, T. & Yilmaz, Y. Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical and mechanical caries removal: status of the restorations at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Clin Oral Invest 11, 69–76 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-006-0072-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-006-0072-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation