Cargando…
Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial
OBJECTIVES: For well-defined deep (> 2/3 dentin extension) carious lesions, selective (SE) or stepwise (SW) carious tissue removals have been recommended, while there is limited comparative evidence for both. We compared SE and SW over 24 months in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: A two-ar...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7819903/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32857210 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03536-6 |
_version_ | 1783639090620530688 |
---|---|
author | Elhennawy, Karim Finke, Christian Paris, Sebastian Reda, Seif Jost-Brinkmann, Paul-Georg Schwendicke, Falk |
author_facet | Elhennawy, Karim Finke, Christian Paris, Sebastian Reda, Seif Jost-Brinkmann, Paul-Georg Schwendicke, Falk |
author_sort | Elhennawy, Karim |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: For well-defined deep (> 2/3 dentin extension) carious lesions, selective (SE) or stepwise (SW) carious tissue removals have been recommended, while there is limited comparative evidence for both. We compared SE and SW over 24 months in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: A two-arm superiority trial was conducted comparing SW/SE in primary molars without pulpal symptoms but well-defined deep lesions. Seventy-four children (1 molar/child) aged 3–9 years were recruited. In a first step, peripheral carious tissue was removed until hard dentin remained, while in proximity to the pulp, leathery dentin was left. An adhesive compomer restoration was placed and restorations re-examined after 6 months. In SW, re-entry and removal to firm dentin was conducted pulpo-proximally, followed by re-restoration. Molars were re-evaluated for a total of 24 months. Our primary outcome was success (absence of restorative/endodontic complications or pulp exposures). Secondary outcomes included total treatment and opportunity costs and restoration quality, assessed using modified USPHS criteria. RESULTS: After 24 months, 63 molars (31 SE, 32 SW) were re-assessed. Four failures occurred (2 exposures in SW; 2 pulpal complications in SE, 1 of them leading to extraction, p > 0.05). Restoration integrity was satisfying in both groups (USPHS A/B/C in 21/8/0 SE and 23/7/0 SW, p > 0.05). Treatment and opportunity costs were significantly higher in SW than SE (mean 171 ± 51 vs. 106 ± 90; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After 2 years, SE and SW showed similar efficacy for managing deep carious lesions in primary molars. The higher costs for SW should be considered during decision-making. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In primary molars with well-defined deep carious lesions SE was less costly and similarly efficacious like SW. From a cost and applicability perspective, SW may need to be indicated restrictively, e.g., for very deep (> 3/4 dentin extension) lesions only. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02232828 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7819903 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78199032021-01-28 Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial Elhennawy, Karim Finke, Christian Paris, Sebastian Reda, Seif Jost-Brinkmann, Paul-Georg Schwendicke, Falk Clin Oral Investig Original Article OBJECTIVES: For well-defined deep (> 2/3 dentin extension) carious lesions, selective (SE) or stepwise (SW) carious tissue removals have been recommended, while there is limited comparative evidence for both. We compared SE and SW over 24 months in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: A two-arm superiority trial was conducted comparing SW/SE in primary molars without pulpal symptoms but well-defined deep lesions. Seventy-four children (1 molar/child) aged 3–9 years were recruited. In a first step, peripheral carious tissue was removed until hard dentin remained, while in proximity to the pulp, leathery dentin was left. An adhesive compomer restoration was placed and restorations re-examined after 6 months. In SW, re-entry and removal to firm dentin was conducted pulpo-proximally, followed by re-restoration. Molars were re-evaluated for a total of 24 months. Our primary outcome was success (absence of restorative/endodontic complications or pulp exposures). Secondary outcomes included total treatment and opportunity costs and restoration quality, assessed using modified USPHS criteria. RESULTS: After 24 months, 63 molars (31 SE, 32 SW) were re-assessed. Four failures occurred (2 exposures in SW; 2 pulpal complications in SE, 1 of them leading to extraction, p > 0.05). Restoration integrity was satisfying in both groups (USPHS A/B/C in 21/8/0 SE and 23/7/0 SW, p > 0.05). Treatment and opportunity costs were significantly higher in SW than SE (mean 171 ± 51 vs. 106 ± 90; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After 2 years, SE and SW showed similar efficacy for managing deep carious lesions in primary molars. The higher costs for SW should be considered during decision-making. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In primary molars with well-defined deep carious lesions SE was less costly and similarly efficacious like SW. From a cost and applicability perspective, SW may need to be indicated restrictively, e.g., for very deep (> 3/4 dentin extension) lesions only. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02232828 Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-08-28 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7819903/ /pubmed/32857210 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03536-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Elhennawy, Karim Finke, Christian Paris, Sebastian Reda, Seif Jost-Brinkmann, Paul-Georg Schwendicke, Falk Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial |
title | Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7819903/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32857210 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03536-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT elhennawykarim selectivevsstepwiseremovalofdeepcariouslesionsinprimarymolars24monthsfollowupfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT finkechristian selectivevsstepwiseremovalofdeepcariouslesionsinprimarymolars24monthsfollowupfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT parissebastian selectivevsstepwiseremovalofdeepcariouslesionsinprimarymolars24monthsfollowupfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT redaseif selectivevsstepwiseremovalofdeepcariouslesionsinprimarymolars24monthsfollowupfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT jostbrinkmannpaulgeorg selectivevsstepwiseremovalofdeepcariouslesionsinprimarymolars24monthsfollowupfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT schwendickefalk selectivevsstepwiseremovalofdeepcariouslesionsinprimarymolars24monthsfollowupfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial |