J A Gil-Montoya1,2, R Mateos-Palacios3, M Bravo4, M A González-Moles5, R Pulgar6. 1. School of Dentistry, Special Care in Dentistry-Gerodontology Department, Granada University, Granada, Spain. jagil@ugr.es. 2. Facultad de Odontología, Paseo de Cartuja, 18071, Granada, Spain. jagil@ugr.es. 3. School of Dentistry, Special Care in Dentistry-Gerodontology Department, Granada University, Granada, Spain. 4. School of Dentistry, Preventive and Public Health in Dentistry Department, Granada University, Granada, Spain. 5. School of Dentistry, Oral Medicine Department, Granada University, Granada, Spain. 6. School of Dentistry, Conservative Dentistry Department, Granada University, Granada, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: New preventive and treatment strategies are required to address the high prevalence of caries among the elderly. The main objective of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of Carisolv® gel to improve the clinical behavior of restorations obtained by atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) in root caries of elderly patients. A secondary objective was to determine the factors associated with the failure of ART restorations after a 2-year follow up. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with 2-year follow-up was designed for this purpose. Candidate caries lesions were randomly assigned to an ART group for root caries treatment with the conventional ART technique, filling with glass ionomer, or an ART + Carisolv® gel for the same ART plus the application of a caries solvent (Carisolv®). Evaluations were conducted at 6, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS:A total of 81 restorations were performed, 37 in the ART group and 44 in the ART + Carisolv® gel group, with 22 and 26 restorations, respectively, surviving at the end of the 24-month follow-up. Survival rates at 24 months did not significantly differ between ART (63 %) and ART + Carisolv® gel (62 %) restorations. The best model for predicting the failure of the restorations included the number of tooth-brushings/day, the presence or not of prosthesis, the anterior or posterior location of the tooth, and the baseline plaque level. CONCLUSION: The application of Carisolv does not modify the survival rate of ART restorations in elderly patients. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of Carisolv gel does not improve the outcomes of atraumatic restorative treatment.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: New preventive and treatment strategies are required to address the high prevalence of caries among the elderly. The main objective of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of Carisolv® gel to improve the clinical behavior of restorations obtained by atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) in root caries of elderly patients. A secondary objective was to determine the factors associated with the failure of ART restorations after a 2-year follow up. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with 2-year follow-up was designed for this purpose. Candidate caries lesions were randomly assigned to an ART group for root caries treatment with the conventional ART technique, filling with glass ionomer, or an ART + Carisolv® gel for the same ART plus the application of a caries solvent (Carisolv®). Evaluations were conducted at 6, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS: A total of 81 restorations were performed, 37 in the ART group and 44 in the ART + Carisolv® gel group, with 22 and 26 restorations, respectively, surviving at the end of the 24-month follow-up. Survival rates at 24 months did not significantly differ between ART (63 %) and ART + Carisolv® gel (62 %) restorations. The best model for predicting the failure of the restorations included the number of tooth-brushings/day, the presence or not of prosthesis, the anterior or posterior location of the tooth, and the baseline plaque level. CONCLUSION: The application of Carisolv does not modify the survival rate of ART restorations in elderly patients. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of Carisolv gel does not improve the outcomes of atraumatic restorative treatment.
Authors: Martin A van 't Hof; Jo E Frencken; Wim H van Palenstein Helderman; Christopher J Holmgren Journal: Int Dent J Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Mary E McNally; Debora C Matthews; Joanne B Clovis; Martha Brillant; Mark J Filiaggi Journal: Gerodontology Date: 2012-12-05 Impact factor: 2.980