Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials on Chemomechanical Caries Removal

The aim of this review was to assess the methodologies used in previously published prospective randomized clinical trials on chemomechanical caries removal and to conduct a meta-analysis to quantify the differences in the excavation time between chemomechanical and conventional caries removal methods.

An electronic search was performed using Scopus, PubMed, EBSCO host, and Cochrane Library databases. The following categories were excluded during the assessment process: non-English studies published before 2000, animal studies, review articles, laboratory studies, case reports, and nonrandomized or retrospective clinical trials. The methodologies of the selected clinical trials were assessed. Furthermore, the reviewed clinical trials were subjected to meta-analysis for quantifying the differences in excavation time between the chemomechanical and the conventional caries removal techniques.

Only 19 randomized clinical trials fit the inclusion criteria of this systematic review. None of the 19 reviewed trials completely fulfilled Delphi's ideal criteria for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials. The meta-analysis results revealed that the shortest mean excavation time was recorded for rotary caries excavation (2.99±0.001 minutes), followed by the enzyme-based chemomechanical caries removal method (6.36±0.08 minutes) and the the hand excavation method (atraumatic restorative technique; 6.98±0.17 minutes). The longest caries excavation time was recorded for the sodium hypochlorite-based chemomechanical caries removal method (8.12±0.02 minutes).

It was found that none of the current reviewed trials fulfilled all the ideal requirements of clinical trials. Furthermore, the current scientific evidence shows that the sodium hypochlorite-based (Carisolv) chemomechanical caries removal method was more time consuming when compared to the enzyme-based (Papacarie) chemomechanical and the conventional caries removal methods. Further prospective randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating the long-term follow-up of papain-treated permanent teeth are needed.