Three incomplete caries removal techniques compared over two years in primary molars with asymptomatic deep caries or reversible pulpitis

• Main Authors: Papimon Chompu-Inwai, Kamolthip Boonsongsawat, Thanapat Sastraruji, Tidarat Sophasri, Siripun Mankaen, Sutasinee Nondon, Sumattaya Tunlek, Supitchaya Katwong
• Format: Journal
• Published: 2018
• Subjects: Dentistry; Medicine
• Online Access: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85002748143&origin=inward; http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/54432
• Institution: Chiang Mai University

To directly compare the survival rates of three incomplete caries removal techniques that differed in the amount of caries removal and the base material used. Methods: Ninety-six primary molars with asymptomatic deep caries or reversible pulpitis were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) indirect pulp treatment (IPT); (2) minimal caries removal with both resin-modified glass ionomer base material and luting cement (MCRB/L); and (3) minimal caries removal with only resin-modified glass ionomer luting cement (MCRL). The treatments were followed clinically and radiographically for two years. Results: The two-year survival probabilities in the IPT, MCRB/L, and MCRL groups were 0.90 (95 percent confidence interval [CI] equals 0.73 to 0.97), 0.93 (95 percent CI equals 0.76 to 0.98), and 0.77 (95 percent CI equals 0.58 to 0.89), respectively. There was no significant difference in the two-year survival probabilities of the three studied groups (generalized Wilcoxon P=.07). Conclusions: Following two years, neither the amount of caries removal nor the base material affected the success of incomplete caries removal treatment. However, minimal caries removal with MCRB/L presented the highest survival rate among the tested groups and resulted in no incidence of pulp exposure.