ArticleThe open dentistry journal2015
Caries Removal by Chemomechanical (Carisolv™) vs. Rotary Drill: A Systematic Review.
Article in The open dentistry journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04573608 (The Impact of Minimally Invasive Restorative Techniques on Dental Pain in Pregnant Women), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
The Impact of Minimally Invasive Restorative Techniques on Dental Pain in Pregnant Women: a Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mapping Systematic Reviews on the Management of Dental Caries in Primary Teeth: A Meta-research.Current pediatric reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative Meta-Analysis of Minimally Invasive and Conventional Approaches for Caries Removal in Permanent Dentition.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Pooled it
- Influence of the chemomechanical and mechanical carious tissue removal on the risk of restorative failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Analyzing working time and efficient caries removal using a novel bioactive caries detecting dye and air polisher prophy for caries excavation: randomised clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Trial
- Volumetric analysis after caries excavation with caries detecting dyes and chemomechanical caries removal agents using 3D scanner-a randomised clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- The impact of minimally invasive restorative techniques on perception of dental pain among pregnant women: a randomized controlled clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2021Trial
- Histological Evaluation of Chemo Mechanical Caries Removal with a Babaco-Based Formulation Gel.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- An in vitro assessment of the residual dentin after using three minimally invasive caries removal techniques.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Diagnosis and Assessment of Dental Caries Using Novel Bioactive Caries Detecting Dye Solution.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis (2010-2020) of the Dental Scientific Literature on Chemo-Mechanical Methods of Caries Removal Using Carisolv and BRIX3000.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
- A five-step risk management process for geriatric dental practice during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.Gerodontology · 2021Review
- Efficacy and Patient's Acceptance of Alternative Methods for Caries Removal-a Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and Interim Therapeutic Restoration: A Review of the Literature.Dentistry journal · 2019Review
- New treatment method for pain and reduction of local anesthesia use in deep caries.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2018Review
- Efficacy of using Carisolv in the removal of decayed tooth structure in primary teeth.Evidence-based dentistry · 2016Article
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
backgroundChemomechanical caries removal is an effective alternative to the traditional rotary drilling method. The advantages of chemomechanical techniques in terms of the need for anesthesia, pain perception and patient preference are systematically reviewed and a meta-analysis of the time required for caries removal is reported.
methodRandomized controlled studies of comparison of chemomechanical techniques with conventional rotary drill were selected from a systematic search of standard biomedical databases, including the PubMed and Cochrane clinical trials. Non-repeated search results were screened for relevance and risk of bias assessment, followed by methodology assessment. Statistical models were applied to the outcome parameters - time required, pain perception, need of anesthesia and patient preference - extracted from the studies.
resultsOut of the 111 non-repeated search results, 26 studies receiving a low bias score were selected for the review, and 16 randomized clinical trials of rotary and Carisolv techniques were considered for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis by fixed effect as well as random effect models indicate that Carisolv takes more time (3.65 ± 0.05 and 4.09 ± 0.29 min) than rotary drill (8.65 ± 0.09 and 8.97 ± 0.66 min) method. Advantages of reduced pain (14.67 for Carisolv vs. 6.76 for rotary drill), need for anesthesia (1.59% vs. 10.52%) outweigh the longer time requirement and make it the preferred (18.68% vs. 4.69%) method.
conclusionChemomechanical techniques stand out as a minimally invasive and preferred method based on the meta-analyses. Evaluation of pain experienced using robust methods is needed to strengthen the evidence for their use.
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.