2008Yati yasui yazhoubingxue zazhiRequires access

Clinical evaluation of carisolv for removal of dental caries in primary teeth

Suyu Wang

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

AIM:To compare the efficiency of Carisolv removing the caries with that of drilling in deciduous teeth,and if the children accept it.METHODS:One hundred children,aged from 6 to 10 years old,with symmetric coronal medium caries in deciduous teeth,were involved in this clinical study.According to a split-mouth design,in each patient caries tissue was removed by using a bur on one side,and Carisolv on the other side.After the carise was removed(wrote down the consumed time) the teeth were restored with composite resin.Patients were asked to fill in a postoperative questionnaire,including the degrade of patients' acceptance of the technique preference.The result was cheeked after one year.RESULTS:The time(min)for Carisolv removing caries was more than drilling method were 4.58±1.27and 2.78±0.86,respectively.The patients felt less pain(82%) in the operation by Carisolv than by drilling.The major patients preferred Carisolv to bur.In 1-year follow-up there was no significant difference in the incidence of secondary caries and restoration lost between Carisolv and drilling treatment.CONCLUSION:Carisolv is a time-consuming technique but the majority of patients accept it because of less pain.Carisolv may have no effect on the secondary caries.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

AIM:To compare the efficiency of Carisolv removing the caries with that of drilling in deciduous teeth,and if the children accept it.METHODS:One hundred children,aged from 6 to 10 years old,with symmetric coronal medium caries in deciduous teeth,were involved in this clinical study.According to a split-mouth design,in each patient caries tissue was removed by using a bur on one side,and Carisolv on the other side.After the carise was removed(wrote down the consumed time) the teeth were restored with composite resin.Patients were asked to fill in a postoperative questionnaire,including the degrade of patients' acceptance of the technique preference.The result was cheeked after one year.RESULTS:The time(min)for Carisolv removing caries was more than drilling method were 4.58±1.27and 2.78±0.86,respectively.The patients felt less pain(82%) in the operation by Carisolv than by drilling.The major patients preferred Carisolv to bur.In 1-year follow-up there was no significant difference in the incidence of secondary caries and restoration lost between Carisolv and drilling treatment.CONCLUSION:Carisolv is a time-consuming technique but the majority of patients accept it because of less pain.Carisolv may have no effect on the secondary caries.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

AIM:To compare the efficiency of Carisolv removing the caries with that of drilling in deciduous teeth,and if the children accept it.METHODS:One hundred children,aged from 6 to 10 years old,with symmetric coronal medium caries in deciduous teeth,were involved in this clinical study.According to a split-mouth design,in each patient caries tissue was removed by using a bur on one side,and Carisolv on the other side.After the carise was removed(wrote down the consumed time) the teeth were restored with composite resin.Patients were asked to fill in a postoperative questionnaire,including the degrade of patients' acceptance of the technique preference.The result was cheeked after one year.RESULTS:The time(min)for Carisolv removing caries was more than drilling method were 4.58±1.27and 2.78±0.86,respectively.The patients felt less pain(82%) in the operation by Carisolv than by drilling.The major patients preferred Carisolv to bur.In 1-year follow-up there was no significant difference in the incidence of secondary caries and restoration lost between Carisolv and drilling treatment.CONCLUSION:Carisolv is a time-consuming technique but the majority of patients accept it because of less pain.Carisolv may have no effect on the secondary caries.

Key concepts: Dentistry, Deciduous teeth, Medicine, Significant difference, Coronal plane, Orthodontics, Radiology, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Clinical evaluation of carisolv for removal of dental caries in primary teeth — Research Paper | ScholarLens