Dataset Information

Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

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?ConclusionsAfter 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.

SUBMITTER: Elhennawy K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7819903 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial.

Elhennawy Karim K Finke Christian C Paris Sebastian S Reda Seif S Jost-Brinkmann Paul-Georg PG Schwendicke Falk F

Clinical oral investigations 20200828 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>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.<h4>Methods</h4>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 ...[more]

PMID: 32857210

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the success, survival and costs of selective versus stepwise carious tissue removal (SE/SW) in permanent teeth with deep (>2/3 dentine depth) carious lesions.DesignRandomised controlled, unicentre, clustered two-arm superiority trial.SettingOutpatient clinic of a private university in Cairo, Egypt.ParticipantsOne hundred and fifteen participants (n=132 teeth), aged 18-47 years, from Cairo, Egypt, were enrolled. Premolars/molars with occlusal/occlusal-proximal deep lesions (radiographically >2/3 dentine), sensible pulps, without spontaneous pain, were included.InterventionsPeripheral carious tissue removal to hard dentine was performed. Pulpo-proximally, soft dentine was left. A glass ionomer (GI) restoration was placed. After 3-4 months, teeth were randomly allocated to SE (n=66), with reduction of the GI into a base and no further tissue removal, followed by a composite resin restoration, or SW (n=66), with full removal of the GI, additional excavation until firm dentine pulpo-proximally, followed by a GI-based composite restoration. Mean follow-up was 1 year.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcome was success (absence of endodontic/restorative complications). Secondary outcomes were tooth survival and initial and total treatment costs.ResultsZero/five pulp exposures occurred during SE/SW, and seven/five SE/SW teeth required endodontic therapy. Success after 12 months was 89.4% for SE and 84.9% for SW. The estimated mean time free of complications was 23 and 18 months for SE and SW, respectively, without significant differences between SE and SW (p>0.05/Cox). Initial treatment costs were significantly higher for SW (mean (SD): 507.5 (123.4) Egyptian pounds (EGP)) than SE (mean (SD): 456.6 (98.3) EGP), while total costs showed no significant difference (p>0.05).ConclusionWithin the limitations of this interim analysis, and considering the depth of these lesions (>2/3 dentine), SE and SW showed similar risk of failure and overall costs after 1 year.Trial registration numberPACTR201603001396248.

Project description:BackgroundAtraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) and the Hall Technique (HT) are both minimally invasive, non-aerosol generating procedures (non-AGPs). They seem to have never been directly compared, nor has the HT been studied in a non-clinical setting. This study compared the HT and ART restorations placed in a school setting after 36 months.MethodsChildren (5-10 yo) who had a primary molar with a dentinal occluso-proximal, cavitated carious lesion were allocated to the ART (selective removal) or HT arms.Primary outcomerestoration survival over 36-months (using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, log rank test, and Cox regression).Secondary outcomes(1) occlusal vertical dimension (OVD) (1, 2, 3, 4 weeks) and (2) child self-reported discomfort; (3) treatment acceptability (immediately following interventions); (4) Child Oral Health Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL), before treatment and after 6 months and (5) a post hoc analysis of time to tooth exfoliation (1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 months).ResultsOne-hundred and thirty-one children (ART = 65; HT = 66) were included (mean age = 8.1 ± 1.2). At 36 months, 112 (85.5%) children were followed-up.Primary outcomerestoration survival rates ART = 32.7% (SE = 0.08; 95% CI 0.17-0.47); HT = 93.4% (0.05; 0.72-0.99), p < 0.001; Secondary outcomes: (1) OVD returned to pre-treatment state within 4 weeks; (2) treatment discomfort was higher for the HT (p = 0.018); (3) over 70% of children and parents showed a high acceptability for treatments, with crown aesthetics being a concern for around 23% of parents; (4) Child OHRQoL improved after 6 months; and (5) teeth treated with the HT exfoliated earlier than those in the ART group (p = 0.007).ConclusionsBoth ART and the HT were acceptable to child participants and their parents and all parents thought both restorations protected their child's tooth. However, the crown appearance concerned almost a quarter of parents in the HT arm. Children experienced less discomfort in the ART group. Although both treatments can be performed in a non-clinical setting and have the advantage of being non-aerosol generating procedures (non-AGPs), the HT had almost three times higher survival rates (93.4%) for restoring primary molar occluso-proximal cavities compared to ART (32.7%).Trial registrationThis trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02569047), 5th October 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02569047?cond=Hall+Technique+Atraumatic+Rest orative+Treatment&draw=2&rank=2.

Project description:For treating deep caries lesions, selective or stepwise (one- and two-step) incomplete excavation seems advantageous compared with complete caries removal. However, current evidence regarding the success, as defined by not requiring any retreatments, or survival of teeth after different excavations is insufficient for definitive recommendation, especially when treating deciduous teeth. Moreover, restoration integrity has not been comparatively analyzed longitudinally, and neither patients', dentists' or parents' preferences nor the clinical long-term costs emanating from both initial and retreatments have been reported yet.The planned study is a prospective multicenter, two-arm parallel group, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing selective and stepwise excavation in deciduous molars with deep, active caries lesions without pulpal symptoms. We will recruit 300 children aged between three and nine-years-old with a minimum of one such molar. Patients participating in another study, or those with systemic diseases, disabilities or known allergies to used materials as well patients with teeth expected to exfoliate within the next 18 months will be excluded. After inclusion, sequence generation will be performed. Initial treatment will follow dental routine. During excavation, leathery, moist and reasonably soft dentin will be left in proximity to the pulp followed by adhesive restoration of the cavity. Afterwards, patients', dentists' and parents' subjective assessment of the treatment will be recorded using visual analogue or Likert scales. Re-examination will be performed after six months, and only then teeth will be allocated to one of the two interventions. Selectively excavated teeth will not be treated further, whilst for stepwise caries removal, a second excavation will be performed until only hard dentin remains. Clinical re-evaluations will be performed after 12, 24 and 36 months. Restorations will be reassessed using modified Ryge criteria. Objectively or subjectively required retreatments will determine success and survival. Retreatments will be evaluated both subjectively and regarding generated costs.Based on the results of the trial, decision-making for treating deep caries lesions in deciduous molars based on multiple criteria should be feasible.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02232828 (registered on 29 November 2014).

Dataset Information

Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Clinical significance

Trial registration

Publications

Selective vs stepwise removal of deep carious lesions in primary molars: 24 months follow-up from a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets