Three Incomplete Caries Removal Techniques Compared Over Two Years in Primary Molars with Asymptomatic Deep Caries or Reversible Pulpitis.

PURPOSE: To directly compare the survival rates of three incomplete caries removal techniques that differed in the amount of caries removal and the base material used.

METHODS

Ninety-six primary molars with asymptomatic deep caries or reversible pulpitis were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) indirect pulp treatment (IPT); (2) minimal caries removal with both resin-modified glass ionomer base material and luting cement (MCRB/L); and (3) minimal caries removal with only resin-modified glass ionomer luting cement (MCRL). The treatments were followed clinically and radiographically for two years.

RESULTS

The two-year survival probabilities in the IPT, MCRB/L, and MCRL groups were 0.90 (95 percent confidence interval [CI] equals 0.73 to 0.97), 0.93 (95 percent CI equals 0.76 to 0.98), and 0.77 (95 percent CI equals 0.58 to 0.89), respectively. There was no significant difference in the two-year survival probabilities of the three studied groups (generalized Wilcoxon P=.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Following two years, neither the amount of caries removal nor the base material affected the success of incomplete caries removal treatment. However, minimal caries removal with MCRB/L presented the highest survival rate among the tested groups and resulted in no incidence of pulp exposure.