A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Chemomechanical (Carie-Care™) Versus Conventional Caries Removal for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment.

Q2 Environmental Science
The Scientific World Journal Pub Date : 2025-01-30 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1155/tswj/6689053
Saloni Gupta, Kalyana Chakravarthy Pentapati, Shashidhar Acharya
{"title":"A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Chemomechanical (Carie-Care™) Versus Conventional Caries Removal for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment.","authors":"Saloni Gupta, Kalyana Chakravarthy Pentapati, Shashidhar Acharya","doi":"10.1155/tswj/6689053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical effectiveness of chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) using Carie-Care™ versus conventional caries removal for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). <b>Methods:</b> The study included 32 children aged 6-15 years with one or more one-surface cavitated carious lesions on the occlusal surface of permanent dentition. A total of 82 restorations were placed in permanent molars. The teeth were randomly assigned to two groups and monitored for 18 months after the intervention. For Group 1, Carie-Care™ gel was applied directly to the carious lesion, followed by cavity washing and gentle excavation using hand instruments. For Group 2, caries was removed using the mechanical method only. The success rate of the restorations, as well as the time taken and pain reactions measured by the sound eye motor (SEM) scale, were assessed between the two groups. <b>Results:</b> The SEM scores were significantly higher (<i>p</i>  <  0.05) in the conventional ART group than in the Carie-Care™ group. The mean time taken for caries removal in the Carie-Care™ group (731.15 ± 197.48 s) was significantly higher than in the ART group (596.66 ± 158.96 s) (<i>p</i> < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the clinical performance of Type IX restoration between the groups (<i>p</i>=0.69). <b>Conclusions:</b> The success rates of the restorations were similar between the two methods. However, the added advantage of less trauma associated with using a chemomechanical agent such as Carie-Care™ makes it an attractive option for community health and school dental programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":22985,"journal":{"name":"The Scientific World Journal","volume":"2025 ","pages":"6689053"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11824596/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Scientific World Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/tswj/6689053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical effectiveness of chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) using Carie-Care™ versus conventional caries removal for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). Methods: The study included 32 children aged 6-15 years with one or more one-surface cavitated carious lesions on the occlusal surface of permanent dentition. A total of 82 restorations were placed in permanent molars. The teeth were randomly assigned to two groups and monitored for 18 months after the intervention. For Group 1, Carie-Care™ gel was applied directly to the carious lesion, followed by cavity washing and gentle excavation using hand instruments. For Group 2, caries was removed using the mechanical method only. The success rate of the restorations, as well as the time taken and pain reactions measured by the sound eye motor (SEM) scale, were assessed between the two groups. Results: The SEM scores were significantly higher (p  <  0.05) in the conventional ART group than in the Carie-Care™ group. The mean time taken for caries removal in the Carie-Care™ group (731.15 ± 197.48 s) was significantly higher than in the ART group (596.66 ± 158.96 s) (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the clinical performance of Type IX restoration between the groups (p=0.69). Conclusions: The success rates of the restorations were similar between the two methods. However, the added advantage of less trauma associated with using a chemomechanical agent such as Carie-Care™ makes it an attractive option for community health and school dental programs.

一项随机对照试验,比较化学机械(龋齿护理™)和传统的非创伤修复治疗龋齿清除。
目的:本研究旨在评估和比较使用龋齿护理™进行化学机械龋齿去除(CMCR)与常规龋齿去除在非创伤性修复治疗(ART)中的临床效果。方法:对32例6 ~ 15岁的恒牙列牙合面有一个或多个单面空化龋病的儿童进行研究。在恒磨牙上共放置了82个修复体。牙齿随机分为两组,干预后监测18个月。对于第1组,直接将龋齿护理™凝胶涂抹在龋齿上,然后用手器械清洗龋齿并轻轻挖掘。第2组仅采用机械除龋法。比较两组的修复成功率,以及用眼动量表(SEM)测量的修复时间和疼痛反应。结果:常规ART组的SEM评分显著高于Carie-Care™组(p < 0.05)。龋齿护理组的平均除龋时间(731.15±197.48 s)显著高于ART组(596.66±158.96 s) (p < 0.001)。但两组间IX型修复体的临床表现无显著差异(p=0.69)。结论:两种修复方法修复成功率相近。然而,与使用化学机械制剂(如龋齿护理™)相关的较少创伤的附加优势使其成为社区健康和学校牙科项目的有吸引力的选择。
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
The Scientific World Journal
The Scientific World Journal 综合性期刊-综合性期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
170
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: The Scientific World Journal is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research, reviews, and clinical studies covering a wide range of subjects in science, technology, and medicine. The journal is divided into 81 subject areas.
×
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