The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2016 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Antibacterial Activity of Two Chemomechanical Caries Removal Gels on Carious Dentin of Primary Teeth: An in vitro Study

Hesham S Khalil, Shabnam Gulzar, Ruchi Arora, Altaf H Shah, Bhupendra Bhardwaj, Ghadah Abusalim, Amjad H Wyne

Citation Information : Khalil HS, Gulzar S, Arora R, Shah AH, Bhardwaj B, Abusalim G, Wyne AH. Antibacterial Activity of Two Chemomechanical Caries Removal Gels on Carious Dentin of Primary Teeth: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016; 17 (12):1027-1032.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1976

Published Online: 01-12-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction

Chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) is an effective method of caries removal especially for primary teeth as they cause less discomfort when compared with conventional caries removal. The most significant thing about caries removal is the elimination of cariogenic bacteria. This study compares the antibacterial activity of two CMCR gels.

Materials and methods

A total of 40 primary molar teeth with carious dentin were split along the long axis in a laboratory. Total viable count (TVC) was taken for the teeth before splitting as a measure of colony-forming units per milliliter (CFU/mL). Each half was treated with either Carisolv or Carie-Care CMCR gels. Clean dentin samples were evaluated for Streptococcus mutans (SM) and Lactobacillus acidophilus (LB) after removal of carious tissue using the caries removal gels using serial dilutions and incubating on specific agar plates.

Results

The results showed significant reduction in mean TVC after use of both the CMCR gels. Both gels reduced the CFU/mL of SM and LB to a significant level (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the antibacterial activities of the two CMCR gels.

Conclusion

The CMCR gels (Carisolv and Carie-Care) significantly reduced the residual TVC as well as SM and LB in carious primary dentin. Both CMCR gels had a similar antibacterial activity on the carious dentin of primary teeth.

Clinical significance

The CMCR gels tested have a significant antibacterial activity and can be effectively used for elimination of caries-causing bacteria in primary teeth.

How to cite this article

Gulzar S, Arora R, Shah AH, Bhardwaj B, Abusalim G, Khalil HS, Wyne AH. Antibacterial Activity of Two Chemomechanical Caries Removal Gels on Carious Dentin of Primary Teeth: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(12):1027-1032.


PDF Share
  1. Minimally invasive dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 2003 Jan;134(1):87-95.
  2. Dental caries: an infectious and transmissible disease. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005 May;26(5 Suppl 1):10-16.
  3. Minimal intervention: a new concept for operative dentistry. Quintessence Int 2000 Sep;31(8):527-533.
  4. Contemporary treatment of incipient caries and the rationale for conservative operative techniques. Dent Clin North Am 2005 Oct;49(4):867-887.
  5. Chemomechanical caries removal in primary teeth in a group of anxious children. J Oral Rehabil 2003 Aug;30(8):773-779.
  6. In vitro evaluation of five alternative methods of carious dentine excavation. Caries Res 2000 Mar-Apr;34(2):144-150.
  7. Chemo-mechanical method: a valuable alternative for caries removal. J Min Intervent Dent 2009 Jul;2(4):248-260.
  8. Chemomechanical caries removal: a comprehensive review of the literature. Int Dent J 2001 Aug;51(4):291-299.
  9. Clinical evaluation of Carisolv in the chemico-mechanical removal of carious dentin. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2001 Fall;26(1):49-54.
  10. Chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) agents: Review and clinical application in primary teeth. J Dent Oral Hygiene 2011 Mar;3(3):34-45.
  11. Effect of Carisolv on the human dental pulp: a histological study. J Dent 2004 May;32(4):309-314.
  12. Papain gel: a new chemo-mechanical caries removal agent. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2005 Winter;30(2):115-119.
  13. Clinical evaluation of Papacarie in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatric Dent 2009 Winter;34(2):117-123.
  14. Conservative dentistry: dentine caries excavation: a review of current clinical techniques. Br Dent J 2000 May;188(9):476-482.
  15. Chemomechanical caries removal: a review and study of an indigenously developed agent (Carie CareTM Gel) in children. J Int Oral Health 2013 Aug;5(4):84-90.
  16. Chemomechanical caries removal: current evidences. RBO 2005;2005:253-259.
  17. Evaluation of the efficacy of caries removal using polymer bur, stainless steel bur, Carisolv, Papacarie.an in vitro comparative study. J Clin Diagn Res 2015 Jul;9(7):ZC42-ZC46.
  18. Efficacy of antimicrobial property of two commercially available chemomechanical caries removal agents (Carisolv and Papacarie): an ex vivo study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2015 May-Jun;5(3):183-189.
  19. In vitro antibacterial effect of the CarisolvR-2 system. Norway: University of Bergen; 2004.
  20. Effectiveness of 2 chemomechanical caries removal methods on residual bacteria in dentin of primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2012 Jul-Aug;34(4):325-330.
  21. Efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal in reducing cariogenic microbiota: a randomized clinical trial. Braz Oral Res 2014;28:1-6.
  22. Chemomechanical caries removal for children. Stomatologija 2005;7(2):40-44.
  23. Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical caries removal in primary molars and its acceptance by patients. Caries Res 2001 May-Jun;35(3):205-210.
  24. Comparison of the efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal (Carisolv) with that of conventional excavation in reducing the cariogenic flora. Int J Paediatr Dent 2004 May;14(3):182-191.
  25. Residual caries detection using visible fluorescence. Caries Res 2002 Sep-Oct;36(5):315-319.
  26. Comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal (Carisolv.) with that of conventional drilling in reducing cariogenic Flora. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008 Apr;32(3):215-219.
  27. Clinical evaluation of efficacy and safety of a new method for chemo.mechanical removal of caries. Caries Res 1999 May-Jun;33(3):171-177.
  28. Cultivatable bacteria in dentine after caries excavation using rose-bur or Carisolv. Caries Res 2003 May-Jun;37:206-211.
  29. Antimicrobial effect of a novel ozone.generating device on micro.organisms associated with primary root carious lesions in vitro. Caries Res 2000 Nov-Dec;34(6):498-501.
  30. Changes in the cultivable flora in deep carious lesions following a stepwise excavation procedure. Caries Res 2000 Nov-Dec;34(6):502-508.
  31. Mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in carious dentine before and after atraumatic restorative treatment. J Dent 2003 Aug;31(6):423-428.
  32. Comparison of the efficacy of chemomechanical and mechanical methods of caries removal in the reduction of streptococcus mutans and lactobacillus spp in carious dentine of primary teeth. J Appl Oral Sci 2005 Dec;13(4):399-405.
  33. Analysis of total microbiota in dentin after mechanical or papain-based chemomechanical caries removal. Gen Dent 2013 Jul;61(4):59-63.
  34. Effect of chemomechanical excavation (Carisolv.) on residual cariogenic bacteria. J Minimum Intervent Dent 2008 Sep;1(1):7.
  35. Current concepts and techniques for caries excavation and adhesion to residual dentin. J Adhes Dent 2011 Feb;13(1):7-22.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.