Rodrigo Alexandre Valério1, Maria Cristina Borsatto2, Monica Campos Serra3, Silvana Aparecida Fernandes Polizeli4, Mariana Alencar Nemezio5, Rodrigo Galo6, Carolina Patrícia Aires7, Ana Carolina Dos Santos8, Silmara Aparecida Milori Corona9. 1. Clinical Pediatric Dentistry Department, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry/ São Paulo University, Café Avenue, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. roavalerio@hotmail.com. 2. Clinical Pediatric Dentistry Department, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry/ São Paulo University, Café Avenue, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. borsatto@forp.usp.br. 3. Restorative Dentistry Department, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry/ São Paulo University, Café Avenue, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. mcserra@forp.usp.br. 4. Clinical Pediatric Dentistry Department, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry/ São Paulo University, Café Avenue, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. silvanapolizeli@hotmail.com. 5. Clinical Pediatric Dentistry Department, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry/ São Paulo University, Café Avenue, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. marianaalencar@usp.br. 6. Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, State Sao Paulo University, Humaitá, 1680 Street, Centro, Araraquara, SP, 14801-903, Brazil. rogallo@usp.br. 7. School of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo University, Café Avenue, s/n, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. airescp@fcfrp.usp.br. 8. School of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo University, Café Avenue, s/n, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. carolinarenan@hotmail.com. 9. Restorative Dentistry Department, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry/ São Paulo University, Café Avenue, Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14040-904, Brazil. silmaracorona@forp.usp.br.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present clinical randomized split-mouth study was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an Er:YAG laser for caries removal in primary molars, microbiological dentin analysis, and clinical restorations after 1 year in 29 children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The children's teeth were randomized into two groups: (I) an Er:YAG laser group and (II) a bur preparation group. The efficiency of the treatments (the time necessary for the removal of carious tissue) was evaluated based on the time spent on caries removal in the deciduous molars. The effectiveness (caries removal capacity) of the caries removal was determined by means of a blind test in which the examiner performed a tactile and visual examination of the dentin. Microbiological analysis was performed by counting the Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus sp in the remaining dentin. Clinical analysis of restorations was performed using the USPHS method in combination with photographs of restored teeth, 7 days after the restorative procedure and again after 1 year. All cavities were restored with the Adper Single Bond 2/Filtek Z350 system. The obtained data were analyzed with a significance level of 5 %. RESULTS: The Er:YAG laser was less effective and had the same efficacy as bur preparation during caries removal at the pulpal wall of deciduous molars. In the surrounding walls, bur preparation was the more effective method. Regardless of the method employed, the affected dentin in the pulpal wall had similar amounts of S. mutans and Lactobacillus sp. The restorations were clinically accepted by the USPHS method over a 1-year period. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that caries removal with an Er:YAG laser has no influence on the clinical behavior of restorations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Irradiation with an Er:YAG laser is appropriate for caries removal in primary teeth.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present clinical randomized split-mouth study was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an Er:YAG laser for caries removal in primary molars, microbiological dentin analysis, and clinical restorations after 1 year in 29 children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The children's teeth were randomized into two groups: (I) an Er:YAG laser group and (II) a bur preparation group. The efficiency of the treatments (the time necessary for the removal of carious tissue) was evaluated based on the time spent on caries removal in the deciduous molars. The effectiveness (caries removal capacity) of the caries removal was determined by means of a blind test in which the examiner performed a tactile and visual examination of the dentin. Microbiological analysis was performed by counting the Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus sp in the remaining dentin. Clinical analysis of restorations was performed using the USPHS method in combination with photographs of restored teeth, 7 days after the restorative procedure and again after 1 year. All cavities were restored with the Adper Single Bond 2/Filtek Z350 system. The obtained data were analyzed with a significance level of 5 %. RESULTS: The Er:YAG laser was less effective and had the same efficacy as bur preparation during caries removal at the pulpal wall of deciduous molars. In the surrounding walls, bur preparation was the more effective method. Regardless of the method employed, the affected dentin in the pulpal wall had similar amounts of S. mutans and Lactobacillus sp. The restorations were clinically accepted by the USPHS method over a 1-year period. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that caries removal with an Er:YAG laser has no influence on the clinical behavior of restorations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Irradiation with an Er:YAG laser is appropriate for caries removal in primary teeth.
Authors: Rubens F de Albuquerque; Timothy W Head; Henis Mian; André Rodrigo; Katia Müller; Karina Sanches; Izabel Yoko Ito Journal: Quintessence Int Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 1.677
Authors: Falk Schwendicke; Tanya Walsh; Thomas Lamont; Waraf Al-Yaseen; Lars Bjørndal; Janet E Clarkson; Margherita Fontana; Jesus Gomez Rossi; Gerd Göstemeyer; Colin Levey; Anne Müller; David Ricketts; Mark Robertson; Ruth M Santamaria; Nicola Pt Innes Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-07-19