Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: KITSAHAWONG,Kemporn
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: SEMINARIO,Ana Lucia, PUNGCHANCHAIKUL,Patimaporn, RATTANACHAROENTHUM,Anoma, PITIPHAT,Waranuch
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Oral Research
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242015000100315
Resumo: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) with that of conventional drilling for efficacy of caries removal, time spent, morphological changes and microhardness of surface dentin, and microleakage of subsequent restorations. Forty-six carious deciduous molars were randomly divided into two groups: one each for caries removal by (1) CMCR and by (2) drilling. The completeness of caries removal was evaluated by visual and tactile criteria and a caries detector device. Twenty teeth in each group were restored with glass ionomer (GI) and subjected to thermocycling before undergoing microleakage and microhardness tests. In each group, three restored teeth were used for polarized light microscopic analysis, and three unrestored teeth for scanning electron microscopy (SEM). There was no significant difference in the completeness of caries removal between groups. However, time spent for caries removal by CMCR was significantly longer than that required for drilling. Restorations in the CMCR group had significantly more microleakage than those in the drilling group. Dentin hardness of the cavity floor after CMCR was also significantly lower. Microscopic analyses showed roughened and irregular dentin surfaces in the CMCR group, unlike the smooth surfaces observed in the drilling group. In conclusion, CMCR was as efficacious as drilling in term of completeness of caries removal, but required longer excavation times and resulted in lower microhardness of residual dentin as well as more microleakage after restorations with GI. Further laboratory and clinical evaluations on the efficiency and performance of CMCR for the durability of subsequent restorations are required.
id SBPQO-1_312b171089ff509f6c3e7b83030d7ad3
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1806-83242015000100315
network_acronym_str SBPQO-1
network_name_str Brazilian Oral Research
repository_id_str
spelling Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro studyDental CariesPapainDentinThe purpose of this study was to compare the performance of chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) with that of conventional drilling for efficacy of caries removal, time spent, morphological changes and microhardness of surface dentin, and microleakage of subsequent restorations. Forty-six carious deciduous molars were randomly divided into two groups: one each for caries removal by (1) CMCR and by (2) drilling. The completeness of caries removal was evaluated by visual and tactile criteria and a caries detector device. Twenty teeth in each group were restored with glass ionomer (GI) and subjected to thermocycling before undergoing microleakage and microhardness tests. In each group, three restored teeth were used for polarized light microscopic analysis, and three unrestored teeth for scanning electron microscopy (SEM). There was no significant difference in the completeness of caries removal between groups. However, time spent for caries removal by CMCR was significantly longer than that required for drilling. Restorations in the CMCR group had significantly more microleakage than those in the drilling group. Dentin hardness of the cavity floor after CMCR was also significantly lower. Microscopic analyses showed roughened and irregular dentin surfaces in the CMCR group, unlike the smooth surfaces observed in the drilling group. In conclusion, CMCR was as efficacious as drilling in term of completeness of caries removal, but required longer excavation times and resulted in lower microhardness of residual dentin as well as more microleakage after restorations with GI. Further laboratory and clinical evaluations on the efficiency and performance of CMCR for the durability of subsequent restorations are required.Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica - SBPqO2015-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242015000100315Brazilian Oral Research v.29 n.1 2015reponame:Brazilian Oral Researchinstname:Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica (SBPqO)instacron:SBPQO10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0127info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKITSAHAWONG,KempornSEMINARIO,Ana LuciaPUNGCHANCHAIKUL,PatimapornRATTANACHAROENTHUM,AnomaPITIPHAT,Waranucheng2018-08-17T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1806-83242015000100315Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bor/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phppob@edu.usp.br||bor@sbpqo.org.br1807-31071806-8324opendoar:2018-08-17T00:00Brazilian Oral Research - Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica (SBPqO)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
title Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
spellingShingle Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
KITSAHAWONG,Kemporn
Dental Caries
Papain
Dentin
title_short Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
title_full Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
title_fullStr Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
title_sort Chemomechanical versus drilling methods for caries removal: an in vitro study
author KITSAHAWONG,Kemporn
author_facet KITSAHAWONG,Kemporn
SEMINARIO,Ana Lucia
PUNGCHANCHAIKUL,Patimaporn
RATTANACHAROENTHUM,Anoma
PITIPHAT,Waranuch
author_role author
author2 SEMINARIO,Ana Lucia
PUNGCHANCHAIKUL,Patimaporn
RATTANACHAROENTHUM,Anoma
PITIPHAT,Waranuch
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv KITSAHAWONG,Kemporn
SEMINARIO,Ana Lucia
PUNGCHANCHAIKUL,Patimaporn
RATTANACHAROENTHUM,Anoma
PITIPHAT,Waranuch
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Dental Caries
Papain
Dentin
topic Dental Caries
Papain
Dentin
description The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) with that of conventional drilling for efficacy of caries removal, time spent, morphological changes and microhardness of surface dentin, and microleakage of subsequent restorations. Forty-six carious deciduous molars were randomly divided into two groups: one each for caries removal by (1) CMCR and by (2) drilling. The completeness of caries removal was evaluated by visual and tactile criteria and a caries detector device. Twenty teeth in each group were restored with glass ionomer (GI) and subjected to thermocycling before undergoing microleakage and microhardness tests. In each group, three restored teeth were used for polarized light microscopic analysis, and three unrestored teeth for scanning electron microscopy (SEM). There was no significant difference in the completeness of caries removal between groups. However, time spent for caries removal by CMCR was significantly longer than that required for drilling. Restorations in the CMCR group had significantly more microleakage than those in the drilling group. Dentin hardness of the cavity floor after CMCR was also significantly lower. Microscopic analyses showed roughened and irregular dentin surfaces in the CMCR group, unlike the smooth surfaces observed in the drilling group. In conclusion, CMCR was as efficacious as drilling in term of completeness of caries removal, but required longer excavation times and resulted in lower microhardness of residual dentin as well as more microleakage after restorations with GI. Further laboratory and clinical evaluations on the efficiency and performance of CMCR for the durability of subsequent restorations are required.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242015000100315
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242015000100315
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0127
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica - SBPqO
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica - SBPqO
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Oral Research v.29 n.1 2015
reponame:Brazilian Oral Research
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica (SBPqO)
instacron:SBPQO
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica (SBPqO)
instacron_str SBPQO
institution SBPQO
reponame_str Brazilian Oral Research
collection Brazilian Oral Research
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Oral Research - Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica (SBPqO)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv pob@edu.usp.br||bor@sbpqo.org.br
_version_ 1750318324366966784