Keywords :
Carie-Care, Caries removal, Chemomechanical caries removal, Dental fear and anxiety, Minimal intervention dentistry, SmartPrep bur
Citation Information :
Shakya R, Koirala B, Dali M, Shrestha S, Birajee G. Evaluation of Caries Removal Using Carie-Care and SmartPrep Burs in Primary Teeth: A Comparative Study. J South Asian Assoc Pediatr Dent 2024; 7 (2):88-93.
Background: As the importance of preserving natural teeth becomes evident, the notion of minimal intervention dentistry (MID) is becoming more acceptable. Two such feasible techniques for caries removal are chemomechanical agents (Carie-Care) and polymer burs (SmartPrep bur).
Aim: To compare the clinical efficacy (effectiveness) and efficiency (time taken) of selective removal of carious dentin using Carie-Care and SmartPrep burs in primary teeth.
Materials and methods: A comparative split-mouth study was carried out on 4–9-year-old children. Around 70 primary second molars in 35 children were allocated to group C (Carie-Care) and group S (SmartPrep burs). Efficacy and efficiency of caries removal, behavioral change, and pain perceived were evaluated in both groups.
Results: The efficacy of caries removal was better with Carie-Care than SmartPrep burs when assessed using visual, tactile, and caries-detector dye methods, though not statistically significant. However, significantly more time was taken for caries removal with Carie-Care than SmartPrep burs (p < 0.001). There was also a statistically significant positive change in behavior in group C and group S when assessed using the Frankl scale (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004) and the Venham scale (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002), respectively. Additionally, 91.4% in group C and 77.1% in group S demonstrated comfort during caries removal, which was statistically nonsignificant (p = 0.101).
Conclusion: Carie-Care and SmartPrep burs were both equally effective and comfortable and brought about a positive behavior change, though Carie-Care was found to be more time-consuming.
Clinical significance: Minimal intervention techniques for caries removal maximize the preservation of healthy dental tissues while reducing dental fear and anxiety (DFA) in children.
Global oral health status report: Towards universal health coverage for oral health by 2030. World Health Organization; 2022.
Bhagat TK, Shrestha A. Prevalence of dental caries among public school children in Eastern Nepal. J Chitwan Med Coll 2014;4(7):30–32. DOI: 10.3126/jcmc.v4i1.10845
Bastola S, Koirala B, Dali M, et al. Dental caries experience in 6–13 years old school children of Dharan sub-metropolitan city, Nepal: a cross-sectional study. J Nepalese Assoc Pediatr Dent 2021;2(1):12–18. DOI: 10.3126/jnapd.v2i1.41559
Nagaveni NB, Radhika NB, Satisha TS, et al. Efficacy of new chemomechanical caries removal agent compared with conventional method in primary teeth: an in vivo study. Int J Oral Health Sci 2016;6(2):52–58. DOI: 10.4103/2231-6027.199986
Hmud R, Walsh LJ. Dental anxiety: causes, complications and management approaches. Int Dent SA 2007;9(5):6–14.
Walsh LJ. Anxiety prevention: implementing the 4 S principle in conservative dentistry. Auxiliary 2007;17(5):24–26.
Taani DQ. Dental attendance and anxiety among public and private school children in Jordan. Int Dent J 2002;52(1):25–29. DOI: 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2002.tb00593.x
Venkataraghavan K, Kush A, Lakshminarayana CS, et al. Chemomechanical caries removal: a review & study of an indigenously developed agent (Carie Care TM gel) in children. J Int Oral Health 2013;5(4):84–90. PMID: 24155626.
Yun J, Shim YS, Park SY, et al. New treatment method for pain and reduction of local anesthesia use in deep caries. J Dent Anesth Pain Med 2018;18(5):277–285. DOI: 10.17245/jdapm.2018.18.5.277
Nalawade HS, Lele GS, Walimbe HS. Comparative evaluation of efficacy of chemomechanical and conventional methods of caries excavation in young permanent molar teeth: in vivo study. J Dent Res Rev 2019;6(1):13–18. DOI: 10.4103/jdrr.jdrr_71_18
Craıg RG, Peyton FA. The micro-hardness of enamel and dentin. J Dent Res 1958;37(4):661–668. DOI: 10.1177/00220345580370041301
Fusayama T, Okuse K, Hosoda H. Relationship between hardness, discoloration, and microbial invasion in carious dentin. J Dent Res 1966;45(4):1033–1046. DOI: 10.1177/00220345660450040401
de Oliviera DS, Barreiros D, da Silva LA, et al. The effect of polymer burs on microbiological reduction of carious dentin in deciduous teeth: a systematic review. Dent 3000 2016;4(1):17–24. DOI: 10.5195/d3000.2016.56
Prabhakar A, Kiran NK. Clinical evaluation of polyamide polymer burs for selective carious dentin removal. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009;10(4):26–34. DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-10-4-26
Lohmann J, Schäfer E, Dammaschke T. Histological determination of cariously altered collagen after dentin caries excavation with the polymer bur PolyBur P1 in comparison to a conventional bud bur. Head Face Med 2019;15(1):19. DOI: 10.1186/s13005-019-0205-9
Wahba W, Sharaf A, Bakery N, et al. Evaluation of polymer bur for carious dentin removal in primary teeth. Alexandria Dent J 2015;40(1):107–112. DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2015.58744
Gupta M, Gugnani N, Pandit I. International caries detection and assessment system (ICDAS): a new concept. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011;4(2):93–100. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1089
Wright GZ, Weinberger SJ, Marti R, et al. The effectiveness of infiltration anesthesia in the mandibular primary molar region. Pediatr Dent 1991;13(5):278–283. PMID: 1815200.
Munshi AK, Hegde AM, Shetty PK. Clinical evaluation of carisolv® in the chemico-mechanical removal of carious dentin. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2001;26(1):49–54. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.26.1.lr48727276478461
Narayan VK, Samuel SR. Appropriateness of various behavior rating scales used in pediatric dentistry: a review. J Global Oral Health 2020;2:112–117. DOI: 10.25259/JGOH_64_2019
Rajakumar S, Mungara J, Joseph E, et al. Evaluation of three different caries removal techniques in children: a comparative clinical study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;38(1):23–26. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.38.1.p3324121m66n1737
Armfield JM, Stewart JF, Spencer AJ. The vicious cycle of dental fear: exploring the interplay between oral health, service utilization and dental fear. BMC Oral Health 2007;7(1):1–15. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6831-7-1
Sajjanshetty S, Hugar D, Hugar S, et al. Decontamination methods used for dental burs - a comparative study. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8(6):ZC39–ZC41. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/9314.4488
Morrison A, Conrod S. Dental burs and endodontic files: are routine sterilization procedures effective? J Can Dent Assoc 2009;75(1):39. PMID: 19239741.
Ericson D, Zimmerman M, Raber H, et al. Clinical evaluation of efficacy and safety of a new method for chemo-mechanical removal of caries: a multi-centre study. Caries Res 1999;33(3):171–177. DOI: 10.1159/000016513
Shivasharan PR, Farhin AK, Wakpanjar MM, et al. Clinical evaluation of caries removal in primary teeth using Carie-care and SmartPrep burs: an in vivo study. Indian J Oral Health Res 2016;2(1):27–31. DOI: 10.4103/2393-8692.184732
Aswathi KK, Rani SP, Athimuthu A, et al. Comparison of efficacy of caries removal using polymer bur and chemomechanical caries removal agent: a clinical and microbiological assessment - an in vivo study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2017;35(1):6–13. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.199232
Shashikala, Krishnamoorthy, Savithasathyaprasad SH, et al. “Carie Care” a novel method of caries removal and its effectiveness: a randomised clinical trial. Int J Develop Res 2017;7(12):17899–17902.
Hegde RJ, Chaudhari S. Comparative evaluation of mechanical and chemo-mechanical methods of caries excavation: an in vivo study. J Int Oral Health 2016;8(3):357–361. DOI: 10.2047/jioh-08-03-11
Kumar KS, Prasad MG, Sandeep RV, et al. Chemomechanical caries removal method versus mechanical caries removal methods in clinical and community-based setting: a comparative in vivo study. Eur J Dent 2016;10(3):386–391. DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.184151
Kakaboura A, Masouras C, Staikou O, et al. A comparative clinical study on the Carisolv caries removal method. Quintessence Int 2003;34(4):269–271. PMID: 12731612.
Bergmann J, Leitão J, Kultje C, et al. Removing dentine caries in deciduous teeth with Carisolv TM: a randomised, controlled, prospective study with chemomechanical treatment with drilling. Oral Health Prev Dent 2005;3(2):105–111. PMID: 16173387.
Sontakke P, Jain P, Patil A, et al. A comparative study of the clinical efficiency of chemomechanical caries removal using Carie-Care gel for permanent teeth of children of age group of 12–15 years with that of conventional drilling method: a randomized controlled trial. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2019;16(1):42–46. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.249558
Morad YO, El Maaty M, Mostafa M. Clinical evaluation of Carie-Care as chemo-mechanical caries removal agent in disabled Egyptian children. Al-Azhar Dent J Girls 2020;7(2):319–327. DOI: 10.21608/adjg.2020.12762.1141
Batista S, Tunas I. The importance of minimal intervention dentistry after the COVID- 19 pandemic: a look to the future. J Dent Otolaryngol 2020;20(6):1–10. DOI: 10.17406/GJMR
Leme RD, Lamarque G de CC, Bastos LA, et al. Minimal intervention dentistry: biocompatibility and mechanism of action of products for chemical-mechanical removal of carious tissue. Front Dent Med 2022;3:1–6. DOI: 10.3389/fdmed.2022.851331