ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry : JCD
Comparative clinical evaluation of the efficacy of a new method for caries diagnosis and excavation.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry : JCD. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in dentistry: Training and testing a caries detection model with intraoral scans.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Fluorescence as a Quantitative Indicator of Cariogenic Bacteria During Chemo-Mechanical Caries Excavation with BRIX 3000 in Primary Teeth.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for dental caries detection: A mixup, fine-tuning, and quantization approach on the MobileNetV2 model.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of caries detector dyes and laser fluorescence systems for intraoperative diagnosis during selective caries removal: a scoping review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Review
- Current Strategies to Control Recurrent and Residual Caries with Resin Composite Restorations: Operator- and Material-Related Factors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Does the heat generated by fluorescence-aided caries excavation system effect the pulp temperature of primary teeth irreversibly? AnJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2021Article
- Microhardness and shear bond-strength of carious dentin after fluorescence-aided or conventionally excavation: (AnJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2018Article
- Comparison of two different methods of detecting residual caries.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2017Article
- Recent Advances in Indirect Pulp Treatment Materials for Primary Teeth: A Literature Review.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistryReview
- Efficacy and Efficiency of Papacarie versus Conventional Method in Caries Removal in Primary Teeth: An SEM Study.Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe purpose of this study is to compare the efficiency of fluorescence-aided caries excavation (FACE) to remove carious dentin primary teeth with that of conventional methods. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After caries excavation was carried out, dentin surfaces were conventionally inspected using visual tactile criteria and 415 cavities which were classified as caries-free, re-inspected with Face-Light and caries detector dye (CDD) methods. Orange-red fluorescing areas classified as carious dentin, as well as stained carious dentin. All the data were recorded according to localization of the caries and determination efficiency of the methods. X(2) test was used to compare the mean values of both Face-Light and dye applications, while Wilcoxon test performed to evaluate the effectiveness for each diagnostic method.
resultsA total of 273 patients with 415 Class II (OM/OD) cavities (1.65 ± 0.52 teeth per patient) with carious lesions in molar and premolar teeth, were examined. Out of 415 teeth, in 149 teeth (35.9%) no caries findings had been illustrated. While FACE detected remaining carious or partially removed areas in 237 teeth (57.2%), CDD stained only 29 teeth by itself (P < 0.05).
conclusionIn conclusion, FACE has a higher detectability compared to visual inspection and caries detector dye in diagnosis and removal of carious dentin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.