J Dent Anesth Pain Med.  2018 Oct;18(5):277-285. 10.17245/jdapm.2018.18.5.277.

New treatment method for pain and reduction of local anesthesia use in deep caries

• Yun J
• Shim YS
• Park SY
• An SY

• KMID: 2424368
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2018.18.5.277

Abstract

Chemo-mechanical caries removal methods are known to be more effective compared with conventional methods in pain reduction. Carie-careâ„¢, a chemo-mechanical caries removal agent, was introduced in 2010 but a systematic review of its efficacy has not yet been performed. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of Carie-careâ„¢ on the outcomes of treatment of caries in children and adolescents. The primary outcome was pain while the secondary outcomes included complete caries removal (CCR), time, need for local anesthesia and behavioral response changes. A Comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to 30 September 2018. The following keywords were used in the search: "˜chemo-mechanical caries removal agent', "˜dental caries', "˜Carie-care', "˜chemo-mechanical caries removal', "˜chemo-mechanical caries excavation', other related keywords, and their combinations. From 942 studies identified, 16 were analyzed. Finally, 4 studies met the eligibility criteria and 260 teeth in 120 children and adolescents were included in this review. This review showed that Carie-careâ„¢ reduces pain during caries treatment but requires a longer time for effective treatment than conventional methods. Local anesthesia was not required in the Chemo-mechanical caries removal (CMCR) group. In addition, dental anxiety decreased compared to the control group, and co-operation was more positive. Therefore, it may be a useful alternative to conventional methods in children and adolescents, but further verification through additional studies is needed.

Keyword

Carie-Care; Chemo-Mechanical Caries Removal; Dental Anxiety; Dental Caries; Local Anesthesia; Pain

MeSH Terms

Adolescent
Anesthesia, Local*
Child
Dental Anxiety
Dental Caries
Humans
Methods*
Tooth

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Flow chart of the literature search process

Reference

1. Geetha Priya PR, Asokan S, John JB, Punithavathy R, Karthick K. Comparison of behavioral response to caries removal methods: a randomised controlled cross over trial. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2014; 32:48–52. PMID: 24531602.

2. Moore R, Birn H, Kirkegaard E, Brødsgaard I, Scheutz F. Prevalence and characteristics of dental anxiety in Danish adults. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1993; 21:292–296. PMID: 8222604.

3. Kim AH, Ahn ES, An SY. Factors affecting dental fear in Korean adolescents. J Korean Dent Sci. 2017; 10:22–28.

4. Bussadori SK, Castro LC, Galvão AC. Papain gel: a new chemo-mechanical caries removal agent. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2005; 30:115–119. PMID: 16491964.

5. Shovelton DS. The maintenance of pulp vitality. Br Dent J. 1972; 133:95–101. PMID: 4510972.

6. Banerjee A, Watson TF, Kidd EA. Dentine caries excavation: a review of current clinical techniques. Br Dent J. 2000; 188:476–482. PMID: 10859846.

7. Maru VP, Shakuntala BS, Nagarathna C. Caries removal by chemomechanical (Carisolv™) vs. rotary drill: a systematic review. Open Dent J. 2015; 31:462–472.

8. Chowdhry S, Saha S, Samadi F, Jaiswal JN, Garg A, Chowdhry P. Recent vs conventional methods of caries removal: a comparative in vivo study in pediatric patients. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2015; 8:6–11. PMID: 26124574.

9. Pandit IK, Srivastava N, Gugnani N, Gupta M, Verma L. Various methods of caries removal in children: a comparative clinical study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2007; 25:93–96. PMID: 17660645.

10. Motta LJ, Bussadori SK, Campanelli AP, da Silva AL, Alfaya TA, de Godoy CH, et al. Pain during removal of carious lesions in children: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Dent. 2013; 2013:896381. PMID: 24363672.

11. Nadanovsky P, Cohen Carneiro F, Souza de Mello F. Removal of caries using only hand instruments: a comparison of mechanical and chemo-mechanical methods. Caries Res. 2001; 35:384–389. PMID: 11641575.

12. Lai G, Lara Capi C, Cocco F, Cagetti MG, Lingström P, Almhöjd U, et al. Comparison of Carisolv system vs traditional rotating instruments for caries removal in the primary dentition: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Odontol Scand. 2015; 73:569–580. PMID: 25772193.

13. Hamama HH, Yiu CK, Burrow MF, King NM. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials on chemomechanical caries removal. Oper Dent. 2015; 40:e167–e178. PMID: 26167737.

14. Li R, Zhao Y, Ye L. How to make choice of the carious removal methods, Carisolv or traditional drilling? a meta-analysis. J Oral Rehabil. 2014; 41:432–442. PMID: 24661083.

15. Deng Y, Feng G, Hu B, Kuang Y, Song J. Effects of Papacarie on children with dental caries in primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2018; 28:361–372. PMID: 29682851.

16. Keenan AV, Congiusta MA. Efficacy of using Carisolv in the removal of decayed tooth structure in primary teeth. Evid Based Dent. 2016; 17:44–45. PMID: 27339236.

17. Goyal PA, Kumari R, Kannan VP, Madhu S. Efficacy and tolerance of papain gel with conventional drilling method: a clinico-microbiological study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2015; 39:109–112. PMID: 25823480.

18. Kavvadia K, Karagianni V, Polychronopoulou A, Papagiannouli L. Primary teeth caries removal using the Carisolv chemomechanical method: a clinical trial. Pediatr Dent. 2004; 26:23–28. PMID: 15080354.

19. Rajakumar S, Mungara J, Joseph E, Philip J, Shilpa Priya MP. Evaluation of three different caries removal techniques in children: a comparative clinical study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2013; 38:23–26. PMID: 24579278.

20. Maragakis GM, Hahn P, Hellwig E. Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical caries removal in primary molars and its acceptance by patients. Caries Res. 2001; 35:205–210. PMID: 11385201.

21. 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; 76:123–129. PMID: 19619425.

22. Nagaveni NB, Radhika NB, Satisha TS, Ashwini KS, Neni S, Gupta S. Efficacy of new chemomechanical caries removal agent compared with conventional method in primary teeth: An in vivo study. Int J Oral Health Sci. 2016; 6:52–58.

23. Venkataraghavan K, Kush A, Lakshminarayana C, Diwakar L, Ravikumar P, Patil S, et al. Chemomechanical caries removal: a review & study of an indigenously developed agent (Carie Care™ gel) in children. J Int Oral Health. 2013; 5:84–90. PMID: 24155626.

24. Hegde RJ, Chaudhari S. Comparative evaluation of mechanical and chemo-mechanical methods of caries excavation: an in vivo study. J Int Oral Health. 2016; 8:357–361.

25. Pathivada L, Krishna MK, Kalra M, Vivekanandan G, Singh J, Navit S. Clinical evaluation of a papain-based gel for the chemo-mechanical removal of caries in children. Oral Health Dent Manag. 2016; 15:145–149.