Acta Scientific Dental Sciences (ISSN: 2581-4893)

Research Article Volume 4 Issue 10

Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of Caries Removal Using Brix 3000 Gel, Polymer Bur and Laser Technique in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Jaya AR1, Kalyani M Choudhar2* and Vinaychandra R3

1Reader, Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Rajarajeswari Dental College and Hospital Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
2II Year Post Graduate Student, Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Rajarajeswari Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
3Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rajarajeswari Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

*Corresponding Author: Kalyani M Choudhar, II Year Post Graduate Student, Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Rajarajeswari Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.

Received: August 31, 2020; Published: September 26, 2020



Background: Newer techniques of Brix 3000 gel, Polymer bur and laser irradiation of dentinal caries removal are minimally invasive methods and should be more frequently employed in Pediatric Dentistry. To evaluate three different techniques of caries excavation in primary teeth in terms of efficacy, efficiency, fear and anxiety experienced during the procedure.

Materials and Methods: Sample of 30 children aged 5 to 9 years were equally divided into 3 groups –Brix 3000 Gel group (Group 1), Polymer bur group (Group 2), Laser group (Group 3).

Microbiological investigation was used to determine efficacy. Time was recorded to determine efficiency and Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scale (WBFPS) was used to assess the pain experienced.

Results: Data obtained were subjected to statistical analysis. Intergroup comparison for Wong Baker Faces Pain Scale (WBFPS) scores and time needed for caries excavation was done using Kruskal Wallis Test. Time required was tested using One-way ANOVA test and the results obtained were statistically significant.

Conclusion: Polymer bur method was more efficient whereas laser and Brix 3000 gel methods were more comfortable.

Keywords: Dental Caries, Primary Molars, Chemomechanical Caries Removal, Polymer Bur; Er:Cr:YSGG Laser



  1. Ferraz C., et al. “Effectiveness of different removal methods of artificially demineralized dentin”. Arquivos em Odontologia2 (2014): 56-62.
  2. Khijmatgar S and Balagopal S. “Minimally Invasive Dentistry: Polymer Burs”. Journal of Dentistry and Oral Biology 2 (2016): 1009.
  3. Ismail M and Haidar A. “Impact of Brix 3000 and conventional restorative treatment on pain reaction during caries removal among group of children in Baghdad city”. JBCD2 (2019): 7-3.
  4. Felizardo KR., et al. “Use of BRIX-3000 Enzymatic Gel in Mechanical Chemical Removal of Caries: Clinical Case Report”. Journal of Health Science2 (2018): 87-93.
  5. Aswathi KK., et al. “Comparison of efficacy of caries removal using polymer bur and chemomechanical caries removal agent: A clinical and microbiological assessment - An in vivo study”. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry 35 (2017): 6-13.
  6. Bohari MR., et al. “Clinical Evaluation of Caries Removal in Primary Teeth using Conventional, Chemomechanical and Laser Technique: An in vivo Study”. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice1 (2012): 40-47.
  7. Mafaz Mahdi Muhsin Ismail., et al. “Evaluation of the Efficacy of Caries Removal Using Papain Gel (Brix 3000) and Smart Preparation Bur (in vivo Comparative Study)”. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research 2 (2019): 444-449.
  8. , et al. “Bactericidal Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG Laser on Streptococcus mutans”. Dental Materials Journal 25.1 (2006): 81-86.
  9. Mallineni SK., et al. “Coronavirus disease (COVID‐19): Characteristics in children and considerations for dentists providing their care”. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry 30 (2020): 245-250.
  10. Al-Halabi., et al. “Assessment of paediatric dental guidelines and caries management alternatives in the post COVID-19 period. A critical review and clinical recommendations”. European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry (2020).
  11. Shivasharan PR., et al. “Clinical Evaluation of Caries Removal in Primary Teeth Using Carie-care and SmartPrep Burs: An In vivo Study”. Indian Journal of Oral Health and Research 2 (2016): 27-31.
  12. Mithra N H and Abhishek M. “Chemomechanical Caries Removal: A Conservative and Pain-Free Approach”. Advanced Research in Gastroenterology and Hepatology 3 (2017): 555666.
  13. Santos CR., et al. “Application of Er,Cr:YSGG Lasers in Cavity Preparation for Dental Tissues: A Literature Review”. World Journal of Dentistry4 (2012): 340-343.
  14. Divya G., et al. “Evaluation of the Efficacy of Caries Removal Using Polymer Bur, Stainless Steel Bur, Carisolv, Papacarie - An Invitro Comparative Study”. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 7 (2015): ZC42‐ZC46.
  15. Ammari MM., et al. “Efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal in reducing cariogenic microbiota: a randomized clinical trial”. Brazilian Oral Research1 (2014): 1-6.
  16. Singh S., et al. “Comparative clinical evaluation of chemomechanical caries removal agent Papacarie® with conventional method among rural population in India - in vivo study”. Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences 3 (2011): 193-198.
  17. Hamdi H Hamama., et al. “Caries Management: A Journey between Black’s principals and Minimally Invasive Concepts”. International Journal of Dentistry and Oral Science 8 (2015): 120-125.
  18. Nalawade HS., et al. “Comparative evaluation of efficacy of chemomechanical and conventional methods of caries excavation in young permanent molar teeth: In vivo study”. Journal of Dental Research and Review 6 (2019): 13-18.
  19. Eren F., et al. “The Effect of Erbium, Chromium:Yttrium-Scandium-Gallium-Garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) Laser Therapy on Pain During Cavity Preparation in Paediatric Dental Patients: A Pilot Study”. Oral Health and Dental Management 2 (2013): 80‐84.
  20. Kohli A and Sahani S. “Chemicomechanical Caries Removal. A Promising Revolution: Say No to Dental Drills”. Journal of International Dental and Medical Research 5 (2015): 158-161.
  21. Kumar J., et al. “A comparative study of the clinical efficiency of chemomechanical caries removal using Carisolv® and Papacarie® - A papain gel”. Indian Journal of Dental Research 23 (2012): 697.
  22. Anegundi RT., et al. “A comparative microbiological study to assess caries excavation by conventional rotary method and a chemo-mechanical method”. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry 4 (2012): 388-392.
  23. Jingarwar MM., et al. “Minimal intervention Dentistry - A new frontier in clinical Dentistry”. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 7 (2014): 4-8.
  24. Motta LJ., et al. “Efficacy of Papacarie (®) in reduction of residual bacteria in deciduous teeth: a randomized, controlled clinical trial”. Clinics (Sao Paulo)5 (2014): 319-322.
  25. Kumar KS., et al. “Chemomechanical caries removal method versus mechanical caries removal methods in clinical and community-based setting: A comparative in vivo study”. European Journal of Dentistry 10 (2016): 386-391.
  26. Prabhakar A., et al. “Clinical Evaluation of Polyamide Polymer Burs for Selective Carious Dentin Removal”. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice 4 (2009): 026-034.
  27. AlHumaid J. “Efficacy and efficiency of papacarie versus conventional method in caries removal in primary teeth: An SEM study”. Saudi Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences 8 (2019): 41-45.
  28. Corrêa FN., et al. “Chemical versus conventional caries removal techniques in primary teeth: A microhardness study”. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry 31 (2007): 187-192.
  29. Garcia-Contreras R., et al. “A comparative in vitro efficacy of conventional rotatory and chemomechanical caries removal: Influence on cariogenic flora, microhardness, and residual composition”. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 6 (2014): 536-540.
  30. Boston DW. “New device for selective dentin caries removal”. Quintessence International 34 (2003): 678-685.


Citation: Kalyani M Choudhar., et al. “Clinical and Microbiological Evaluation of Caries Removal Using Brix 3000 Gel, Polymer Bur and Laser Technique in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study”. Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 4.10 (2020): 105-111.


Acceptance rate30%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
Impact Factor1.278

Indexed In

News and Events

  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is May 30, 2024.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of "Best Article of the Issue"
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.

Contact US