Comparative evaluation of caries removal efficacy using enzymatic gel BRIX 3000 and polymer burs in primary molars

In vivo study

https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS8.13023

Authors

  • Pranjali Gunjal Postgraduate, Department of Pedodontics & preventive dentistry, Dr.D.Y. Patil Dental College & Hospital, Dr.D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pimpri, Pune, Maharasthra, India
  • Rashmi Singh Chauhan Professor, Department of Pedodontics & preventive dentistry, Dr.D.Y. Patil Dental College & Hospital, Dr.D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pimpri, Pune, Maharasthra, India
  • Sunnypriyatham Tirupathi Assistant Professor, Department of Pedodontics & preventive dentistry, Dr.D.Y.Patil Dental College & Hospital, Dr.D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pimpri, Pune, Maharasthra, India
  • Vishwas Patil Senior consultant, Pediatric dentistry. Surya mother and child care hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India- 411018
  • Ashrita Suvarna Postgraduate, Department of Pedodontics & preventive dentistry, Dr.D.Y.Patil Dental College & Hospital, Dr.D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pimpri,Pune,Maharasthra, India
  • Sejal Shah Postgraduate, Department of Pedodontics & preventive dentistry, Dr.D.Y.Patil Dental College & Hospital, Dr.D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pimpri,Pune,Maharasthra, India

Keywords:

Brix 3000, caries excavation, chemomechanical agent, enzymatic gel, minimal invasive dentistry, primary teeth, polymer bur, pain, duration

Abstract

Aim: The study compares and evaluates enzymatic gel Brix 3000â and Polymer bur (SS White) for caries excavation in primary molars in terms of two parameters such as pain reaction and the time taken for caries excavation. Method:  60 children aged 7-9 years who require caries removal were recruited for the study and were randomly allocated into two groups: Group-A: Enzymatic gel (Brix 3000)â, Group-B: Smart burs (SS White polymer burs). The objectives evaluated were, observed pain reaction of the child (SEM scale) during the procedure and the total time taken for caries excavation. Results: The results suggest a significant difference between among the groups Brix 3000â showed superior results compared to group B (Smart burs) i.e., use of Brix 3000â for caries excavation took less time and showed minimal pain reaction. Conclusion: We can conclude that the newer enzymatic gel Brix 3000 is a viable alternative to other minimally invasive procedures. Clinical Significance: Method practiced to minimise the treatment time and discomfort, especially in pediatric age group it becomes important factor to obtain child cooperation. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alkhouli MM, Al Nesser SF, Bshara NG, AlMidani AN, Comisi JC. Comparing the efficacies of two chemo-mechanical caries removal agents (2.25% sodium hypochlorite gel and brix 3000), in caries removal and patient cooperation: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Dent 2020;93:103280.

Arrow P, McPhee R, Atkinson D, Mackean T, Kularatna S, Tonmukayakul U, et al. Minimally Invasive Dentistry Based on Atraumatic Restorative Treatment to Manage Early Childhood Caries in Rural and Remote Aboriginal Communities: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc 2018 25;7:e10322.

Aswathi KK, Rani SP, Athimuthu A, Prasanna P, Patil P, Deepali KJ. Comparison of efficacy of caries removal using polymer bur and chemomechanical caries removal agent: A clinical and microbiological assessment - An in vivo study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2017 ;35:6–13.

Boston DW, Graver HT. Histological study of an acid red caries-disclosing dye. Oper Dent 1989;14:186–92.

Cardoso M, Coelho A, Lima R, Amaro I, Paula A, Marto CM, et al. Efficacy and Patient’s Acceptance of Alternative Methods for Caries Removal-a Systematic Review. J Clin Med 2020;9:E3407.

de Almeida Neves A, Coutinho E, Cardoso MV, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Current concepts and techniques for caries excavation and adhesion to residual dentin. J Adhes Dent 2011;13:7–22.

Frencken JE, Peters MC, Manton DJ, Leal SC, Gordan VV, Eden E. Minimal Intervention Dentistry (MID) for managing dental caries – a review. Int Dent J 2012 ;62:223–43.

Hamama H, Yiu C, Burrow M. Current update of chemomechanical caries removal methods. Aust Dent J 2014 ;59:446–56; quiz 525.

Inamdar MS, Chole DG, Bakle SS, Gandhi NP, Hatte NR, Rao MP. Comparative evaluation of BRIX3000, CARIE CARE, and SMART BURS in caries excavation: An in vivo study. J Conserv Dent 2020 ;23:163–8.

Kathuria V, Ankola AV, Hebbal M, Mocherla M. Carisolv- An Innovative Method of Caries Removal. J Clin Diagn Res 2013 ;7:3111–5.

Katiyar A, Gupta S, Gupta K, Sharma K, Tripathi B, Sharma N. Comparative Evaluation of Chemo-mechanical and Rotary-mechanical Methods in Removal of Caries with Respect to Time Consumption and Pain Perception in Pediatrc Dental Patients. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14:115–9.

Kumar KVKS, Prasad MG, Sandeep RV, Reddy SP, Divya D, Pratyusha K. Chemomechanical caries removal method versus mechanical caries removal methods in clinical and community-based setting: A comparative in vivo study. Eur J Dent 2016;10:386–91.

Manocha S, Taneja N. Assessment of paediatric pain: a critical review. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol 2016 ;27:323–31.

Maragakis GM, Hahn P, Hellwig E. Chemomechanical caries removal: a comprehensive review of the literature. Int Dent J 2001;51:291–9.

Maru VP, Shakuntala BS, Nagarathna C. Caries Removal by Chemomechanical (CarisolvTM) vs. Rotary Drill: A Systematic Review. Open Dent J 2015;9:462–72.

Meller C, Welk A, Zeligowski T, Splieth C. Comparison of dentin caries excavation with polymer and conventional tungsten carbide burs. Quintessence Int 2007 ;38:565–9.

Montedori A, Abraha I, Orso M, D’Errico PG, Pagano S, Lombardo G. Lasers for caries removal in deciduous and permanent teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;2016:9CD010229.

Prabhakar A, Kiran NK. Clinical evaluation of polyamide polymer burs for selective carious dentin removal. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009;10:26–34.

Soleymani A, Bahrololoomi Z, Javadinejadi S, Salehi P. Evaluation of the Effects of Enameloplasty and Air Abrasion on Sealant Micro-Leakage. J Dent Tehran Iran 2014 ;11:639–43.

Vusurumarthi V, Ballullaya SV, Pushpa S, Veluvarti VRK, Loka PR, Galla PK. Evaluation and Comparison of Caries Excavation Efficacy of Three Different Burs: A Micro-computed Tomographic-assisted Study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2020;10:213–9.

Zhang Y, Chen W, Zhang J, Li Y. Does Er,Cr:YSGG reduce the microleakage of restorations when used for cavity preparation? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health 2020;20:269.

Published

27-09-2022

How to Cite

Gunjal, P., Chauhan, R. S., Tirupathi, S., Patil, V., Suvarna, A., & Shah, S. (2022). Comparative evaluation of caries removal efficacy using enzymatic gel BRIX 3000 and polymer burs in primary molars: In vivo study. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(S8), 3957–3965. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS8.13023

Issue

Section

Peer Review Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)