PDF icon Download PDF
Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2016; 5(01): 1-5
DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.172734
Original Article

Comparison of chemomechanical caries removal using Papacárie versus conventional method in children

Merve Erkmen Almaz
Kırıkkale University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Kırıkkale, Turkey
,
Işıl Şaroğlu Sönmez
1   Adnan Menderes University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Aydın, Turkey
,
Aylin Akbay Oba
Kırıkkale University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Kırıkkale, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available ateRef
 PDF Download Permissions and Reprints
Preview

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal (Papacárie), compared with the conventional method. Materials and Methods: The study consisted of 50 primary molars selected from 25 healthy children (mean age 7.6 ± 1.1). Each patient had at least two primary molars with approximately equal-size caries lesions. Both treatments were carried out in the same session. Before and after treatment, fluorescence values were obtained using DIAGNOdent Pen and time needed for caries removal was recorded. Each patient was asked whether he/she felt any pain, requested for local anesthesia, which treatment he/she preferred, and behavior of the patient during caries removal was assessed. Data were analyzed using McNemar, Wilcoxon signed rank, and Mann-Whitney U-test. Results: The clinical evaluation revealed that all the cavities were caries free after both techniques. Comparison of the difference in fluorescence values showed that readings were lower after conventional method (P < 0.05). The time taken for chemomechanical caries removal was approximately 2 times longer (t-test). There was no difference between two methods in terms of pain and patient behavior (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Chemomechanical caries removal and conventional method exhibited similar efficacy in caries removal.

Keywords

Dental caries - Papacárie - primary teeth


Publication History

Article published online:
01 November 2021

© 2016. European Journal of General Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Martins MD, Fernandes KP, Motta LJ, Santos EM, Pavesi VC, Bussadori SK. Biocompatibility analysis of chemomechanical caries removal material Papacárie on cultured fibroblasts and subcutaneous tissue. J Dent Child (Chic) 2009;76:123-9.
  • 2 Jawa D, Singh S, Somani R, Jaidka S, Sirkar K, Jaidka R. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal agent (Papacarie) and conventional method of caries removal: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2010;28:73-7.
  • 3 Horowitz AM. Introduction to the symposium on minimal intervention techniques for caries. J Public Health Dent 1996;56:133-4.
  • 4 Habib CM, Kronman J, Goldman M. A chemical evaluation of collagen and hydroxyproline after treatment with GK-101 (N-Chloroglycine). Pharmacol Ther Dent 1975;2:209-15.
  • 5 Schutzbank SG, Galaini J, Kronman JH, Goldman M, Clark RE. A comparative in vitro study of GK-101 and GK-101E in caries removal. J Dent Res 1978;57:861-4.
  • 6 Bussadori SK, Guedes CC, Martins MD, Fernandes KP, Santos EM. Gel a base de papaína: Uma nueva alternativa para la remoción química y mecânica de lãs caries. Actas Oodntológicas 2006;3:35-9.
  • 7 Carrillo CM, Tanaka MH, Cesar MF, Camargo MA, Juliano Y, Novo NF. Use of papain gel in disabled patients. J Dent Child (Chic) 2008;75:222-8.
  • 8 Bussadori SK, Castro LC, Galvão AC. Papain gel: A new chemo-mechanical caries removal agent. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2005;30:115-9.
  • 9 Pereira SA, Silva LR, Motta LJ, Bussadori SK. Remoção químico-mecânica da cárie por meio do gel Papacárie. RGO 2004;52:385-8.
  • 10 Motta LJ, Martins MD, Porta KP, Bussadori SK. Aesthetic restoration of deciduous anterior teeth after removal of carious tissue with Papacárie. Indian J Dent Res 2009;20:117-20.
  • 11 Gupta S, Singh C, Yeluri R, Chaudhry K, Munshi AK. Clinical and microbiological evaluation of the carious dentin before and after application of Papacarie gel. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;38:133-8.
  • 12 Kotb RM, Abdella AA, El Kateb MA, Ahmed AM. Clinical evaluation of Papacarie in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2009;34:117-23.
  • 13 Viral PM, Nagarathna C, Shakuntala BS. Chemomechanical caries removal in primary molars: Evaluation of marginal leakage and shear bond strength in bonded restorations - An in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;37:269-74.
  • 14 Bohari MR, Chunawalla YK, Ahmed BM. Clinical evaluation of caries removal in primary teeth using conventional, chemomechanical and laser technique: An in vivo study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13:40-7.
  • 15 Kochhar GK, Srivastava N, Pandit IK, Gugnani N, Gupta M. An evaluation of different caries removal techniques in primary teeth: A comparitive clinical study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011;36:5-9.
  • 16 Lozano-Chourio MA, Zambrano O, González H, Quero M. Clinical randomized controlled trial of chemomechanical caries removal (Carisolv). Int J Paediatr Dent 2006;16:161-7.
  • 17 Inglehart MR, Peters MC, Flamenbaum MH, Eboda NN, Feigal RJ. Chemomechanical caries removal in children: An operator’s and pediatric patients’ responses. J Am Dent Assoc 2007;138:47-55.
  • 18 Corrêa FN, Rodrigues Filho LE, Rodrigues CR. Evaluation of residual dentin after conventional and chemomechanical caries removal using SEM. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008;32:115-20.
  • 19 Frankl SN, Shiere FR, Fogels HR. Should the parent remain with the child in the dental operatory? J Dent Child 1962;2:150-63.
  • 20 Maragakis GM, Hahn P, Hellwig E. Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical caries removal in primary molars and its acceptance by patients. Caries Res 2001;35:205-10.
  • 21 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 Investig 2007;11:69-76.
  • 22 Lopes MC, Mascarini RC, da Silva BM, Flório FM, Basting RT. Effect of a papain-based gel for chemomechanical caries removal on dentin shear bond strength. J Dent Child (Chic) 2007;74:93-7.
  • 23 Gianini RJ, do Amaral FL, Flório FM, Basting RT. Microtensile bond strength of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems to demineralized dentin after the use of a papain-based chemomechanical method. Am J Dent 2010;23:23-8.
  • 24 Corrêa FN, Rocha RO, Soares FZ, Rodrigues-Filho LE, Rodrigues CR. Fluorescence of primary dentine after chemomechanical and conventional rotary excavation. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2008;9:126-9.
  • 25 Kumar J, Nayak M, Prasad KL, Gupta N. A comparative study of the clinical efficiency of chemomechanical caries removal using Carisolv® and Papacarie® - A papain gel. Indian J Dent Res 2012;23:697.
  • 26 Bussadori SK, Guedes CC, Hermida Bruno ML, Ram D. Chemo-mechanical removal of caries in an adolescent patient using a papain gel: Case report. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008;32:177-80.
  • 27 Abdelnur JP, Cerqueira DF, Castro GF, Maia LC, de Souza IP. Strategies for addressing restorative challenges in HIV-infected children. J Dent Child (Chic) 2008;75:69-73.
  • 28 Gurbuz T, Yilmaz Y, Sengul F. Performance of laser fluorescence for residual caries detection in primary teeth. Eur J Dent 2008;2:176-84.
  • 29 Neves AA, Coutinho E, De Munck J, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Does DIAGNOdent provide a reliable caries-removal endpoint? J Dent 2011;39:351-60.
  • 30 Yazici AR, Atílla P, Ozgünaltay G, Müftüoglu S.In vitro comparison of the efficacy of Carisolv and conventional rotary instrument in caries removal. J Oral Rehabil 2003;30:1177-82.
  • 31 Ericson D, Zimmerman M, Raber H, Götrick B, Bornstein R, Thorell J. Clinical evaluation of efficacy and safety of a new method for chemo-mechanical removal of caries. A multi-centre study. Caries Res 1999;33:171-7.
  • 32 Kakaboura A, Masouras C, Staikou O, Vougiouklakis G. A comparative clinical study on the Carisolv caries removal method. Quintessence Int 2003;34:269-71.
  • 33 Kavvadia K, Karagianni V, Polychronopoulou A, Papagiannouli L. Primary teeth caries removal using the Carisolv chemomechanical method: A clinical trial. Pediatr Dent 2004;26:23-8.
  • 34 Silva LR, Motta LJ, Reda SH, Façanha RA, Bussadori SK. Papacarie - A new system for the chemomechanical caries removal-case report. Rev Paul Odontol 2004;26:4-8.
  • 35 Peters MC, Flamenbaum MH, Eboda NN, Feigal RJ, Inglehart MR. Chemomechanical caries removal in children: Efficacy and efficiency. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:1658-66.