Comparing efficacies of various papain-based enzyme agents and 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel in chemomechanical caries removal: a randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.5 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
M H D Baraa Alsayed, Mawia Karkoutly, Hassan Achour, Souad Abboud
{"title":"Comparing efficacies of various papain-based enzyme agents and 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel in chemomechanical caries removal: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"M H D Baraa Alsayed, Mawia Karkoutly, Hassan Achour, Souad Abboud","doi":"10.1038/s41405-024-00258-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacies of Papacarie Duo gel, Brix 3000, Selecti-Solve gel, 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel, and conventional rotary-mechanical method in caries removal and to evaluate the patient comfort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>It was a single-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, active-controlled trial with five arms. It was conducted at the Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Damascus University. Seventy-five specimens were randomly allocated into five groups: chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) using Selecti-Solve gel (G1), BRIX3000 (G2), Papacarie DUO gel (G3), or 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel (G4), and caries excavation using conventional rotary-mechanical method (G5) (control group). The trial considered healthy patients aged 18-40. Permanent molars with class I carious lesions extending to the middle third of dentin with no pulpal and/or periodontal pathology were included. The efficacy of caries removal was considered the primary outcome measure, and the secondary outcome measures were treatment time, volumetric measurement of the cavity, and pain assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority (73.30%) of cases from BRIX3000 and conventional rotary-mechanical method groups showed complete caries removal (p = 0.982). The mean time of caries removal was the highest (17.45 ± 4.42) in the 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel group (p < 0.05), and the lowest (6.33 ± 1.69) was in the conventional rotary-mechanical method group (p < 0.05). The mean cavity volume was the highest (18.97 ± 9.76) in the Papacarie DUO gel group, and the lowest (14.87 ± 4.76) was in the 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel group (p = 0.506). The conventional rotary-mechanical group exhibited the highest mean score (5.40 ± 1.72) of pain (p < 0.05). However, the mean score (2.67 ± 1.11) of pain reported reduced in the BRIX3000 group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CMCR agents could be a potential substitute for conventional rotary instrumentation methods, taking into account the long working time.</p>","PeriodicalId":36997,"journal":{"name":"BDJ Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11375084/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BDJ Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-024-00258-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacies of Papacarie Duo gel, Brix 3000, Selecti-Solve gel, 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel, and conventional rotary-mechanical method in caries removal and to evaluate the patient comfort.

Methods: It was a single-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, active-controlled trial with five arms. It was conducted at the Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Damascus University. Seventy-five specimens were randomly allocated into five groups: chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) using Selecti-Solve gel (G1), BRIX3000 (G2), Papacarie DUO gel (G3), or 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel (G4), and caries excavation using conventional rotary-mechanical method (G5) (control group). The trial considered healthy patients aged 18-40. Permanent molars with class I carious lesions extending to the middle third of dentin with no pulpal and/or periodontal pathology were included. The efficacy of caries removal was considered the primary outcome measure, and the secondary outcome measures were treatment time, volumetric measurement of the cavity, and pain assessment.

Results: The majority (73.30%) of cases from BRIX3000 and conventional rotary-mechanical method groups showed complete caries removal (p = 0.982). The mean time of caries removal was the highest (17.45 ± 4.42) in the 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel group (p < 0.05), and the lowest (6.33 ± 1.69) was in the conventional rotary-mechanical method group (p < 0.05). The mean cavity volume was the highest (18.97 ± 9.76) in the Papacarie DUO gel group, and the lowest (14.87 ± 4.76) was in the 2.4% sodium hypochlorite gel group (p = 0.506). The conventional rotary-mechanical group exhibited the highest mean score (5.40 ± 1.72) of pain (p < 0.05). However, the mean score (2.67 ± 1.11) of pain reported reduced in the BRIX3000 group.

Conclusions: CMCR agents could be a potential substitute for conventional rotary instrumentation methods, taking into account the long working time.

Abstract Image

比较各种木瓜蛋白酶酶制剂和 2.4% 次氯酸钠凝胶在化学机械除龋中的功效:随机对照试验。
研究目的本研究旨在评估和比较Papacarie Duo凝胶、Brix 3000、Selecti-Solve凝胶、2.4%次氯酸钠凝胶和传统旋转机械法在去除龋齿方面的疗效,并评估患者的舒适度:这是一项单盲、随机、平行组、主动对照试验,共有五组。试验在大马士革大学牙体修复和牙髓病学系进行。75例标本被随机分配到五组:使用Selecti-Solve凝胶(G1)、BRIX3000(G2)、Papacarie DUO凝胶(G3)或2.4%次氯酸钠凝胶(G4)的化学机械除龋(CMCR)组,以及使用传统旋转机械方法的龋齿挖掘组(G5)(对照组)。试验对象为 18-40 岁的健康患者。试验对象包括Ⅰ类龋坏扩展至牙本质中三分之一处且无牙髓和/或牙周病变的恒磨牙患者。龋齿去除的疗效被认为是主要结果指标,次要结果指标是治疗时间、龋洞体积测量和疼痛评估:结果:BRIX3000 和传统旋转机械法组的大多数病例(73.30%)显示龋齿完全清除(P = 0.982)。2.4% 次氯酸钠凝胶组的平均除龋时间最长(17.45 ± 4.42)(p 结论:BRIX3000 和传统旋转机械法组的平均除龋时间最长(17.45 ± 4.42):考虑到工作时间较长,CMCR 药剂有可能替代传统的旋转器械方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BDJ Open
BDJ Open Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
34
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信