ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2025
Comparative Evaluation of Caries Removal Efficacy of Ceramic Bur, Polymer Smart Bur, and Conventional Tungsten Carbide Bur in Primary Molars: A Clinical Study.
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Caries removal efficiency and minimally invasive potential of SmartPrep burs, Brix 3000, and excavus: A micro-computed tomography comparative study.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Pain perception and treatment time of chemo mechanical versus conventional caries removal techniques in pediatric dental patients.Bioinformation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim and background: In pediatric dentistry, successful dental care involves both the proper execution of the procedure and the development of a positive approach to dental visits. Recent advances in conservative dentistry have introduced self-limiting methods for caries removal, designed to reduce pain and discomfort while enhancing patient comfort. The present Methods: A total of 90 primary molars from 30 children (21 boys and 9 girls) aged between 5 and 9 years (mean age 6.77 ± 1.36) were included. Caries excavation was carried out using tungsten carbide burs (group I), polymer burs (group II), and ceramic burs (group III). The parameters assessed were the efficacy of caries removal, time required for excavation, and pain perception, and comparisons were made among the three groups. Results: Polymer burs required significantly more time for caries excavation than both tungsten carbide and ceramic burs. Caries removal efficacy was highest with tungsten carbide burs, followed by ceramic burs, while polymer burs showed the lowest efficacy, with statistically significant differences between groups. Pain perception was lower with ceramic and polymer burs compared to tungsten carbide burs. Conclusion: Ceramic burs are more efficient than polymer burs in minimally invasive caries excavation. Clinical significance: Minimally invasive dentistry in pediatric patients is clinically significant as it focuses on early prevention, preserves tooth structure, minimizes discomfort and trauma, and supports long-term oral health through less invasive, more child-friendly techniques. This study provides evidence that the ceramic bur is an effective minimal invasive tool for caries excavation. How to cite this article: Krishnaveni L, Dash JK, Baliarsingh RR,
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.