ReviewBiomedicines2024
Antimicrobial Efficacy of Chemomechanical Carie Removal Agents-A Systematic Integrative Review.
Review in Biomedicines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the Efficiency of the Carie-Care and Bromelain Gel, as Chemomechanical Caries Removal Techniques in Primary Teeth: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial Efficacy of Photodynamic Therapy as an Adjunct to Brix 3000 in Minimally Invasive Management of Carious Lesions in Primary Teeth.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pain Perception During Minimally Invasive Caries Removal in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Chemo-Mechanical Caries Removal.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDental caries is the most common oral disease in the world. When treatable, the drilling method continues to be used. This technique has its disadvantages because it is invasive and nonspecific. Chemomechanical carious tissue removal agents (CCRAs) such as Carisolv™ or Papacarie
objectivesThe aim is to analyze whether CCRAs have a relevant antimicrobial effect on cariogenic bacteria.
methodsA bibliographic search strategy was carried out in online databases using PRISMA 2020. The evaluation of the antibacterial efficacy of CCRAs was carried out through the analysis of the reduction in CFUs of cariogenic bacteria, and the presence of bacterial deposits, TVC, SVC and LVC by comparison with conventional drilling methods.
resultsThe results showed that the percentage of reduction in TVC, SVC and LVC for each agent is mostly high, but not significantly different from mechanical methods. The best results were found with CCRAs when compared to polymeric drills. The results also showed that there is a lack of methodological standardization.
conclusionsCCRAs have been shown to have a relevant antimicrobial effect on cariogenic bacteria; however, more studies need to be carried out using standardized methodologies.
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.