Main Article Content



There are different caries removal methods including conventional rotary caries removal, atraumatic restorative therapy, air abrasion, lasers, and chemo-mechanical caries removal (CMCR). Chemo-mechanical caries removal is an alternative treatment for active caries, that involves the caries removal of only infected dental tissue and acts by the dissolution of carious lesions with natural or synthetic agents.


Comparison of chemo-mechanical material (CariSolv) and the mechanical method (Smart bur & Carbide bur) of caries removal under a self-illuminated microscope and stereomicroscope in terms of efficacy and time duration.


Tooth was sectioned in 4 parts and grouped into 4 as group 1, group 2, group 3, and group 4. Each group was treated with different caries removal methods of carbide bur, smart bur, CariSolv and control group. Examined under self-illuminated and stereomicroscope at 10 different points from middle to periphery.


Carbide bur specimens have a negligible amount of affected dentin and there is a destruction of dentinal tubules when compared to the smart bur group & CariSolv group. Showing affected dentin thickness in 4 groups at 10 different positions from the middle part of the lesion to the periphery (i.e., towards CEJ & cusp tip) by using a stereomicroscope.


The CariSolv group demonstrated the presence of affected dentine higher and took twice the time to remove caries but was easy to induce and conserved the healthy tooth structure when compared to carbide and smart bur groups. Less amount of affected dentine was seen in the carbide bur group but there was a destruction of sound dentine.



Chemo Mechanical Methods, CariSolv, Conventional Caries Removal, Affected Dentin, Infected Dentin, Mechanical Methods.

Article Details

How to Cite
Rohith Shinde, Naresh Krishna Reddy, Sri Mouna Govardhani Kottapalli, Sahithi Nammaniwar, Sanganand Gavle, & Pranitha Shinde. (2023). Evaluation and Comparison of the Efficacy of Chemo-Mechanical, Mechanical Methods of Caries Removal under Self-Illuminated Light Microscope and Stereomicroscope – An In Vitro Study. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences, 12(9), 275–279.


  1. Katiyar A, Gupta S, Gupta K, et al. Comparative evaluation of chemo-mechanical and rotary-mechanical methods in removal of caries with respect to time consumption and pain perception in pediatrc dental patients. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(1):115-9.
  2. Bulut G, Zekioglu O, Eronat C, et al. Effect of CariSolv™ on the human dental pulp: a histological study. J Dent 2004;32(4):309-14.
  3. Cederlund A, Lindskog S, Blomlöf J. Efficacy of CariSolv assisted caries excavation. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1999;19(5):465-9.
  4. Zinck JH, McInnes-Ledoux P, Capdeboscq C, et al. Chemomechanical caries removal: a clinical evaluation. J Oral Rehabil 1988;15(1):23-33.
  5. Chaussain-Miller C, Decup F, Domejean-Orliaguet S, et al. Clinical evaluation of the CariSolv TM chemomechanical caries removal technique according to the site/stage concept, a revised caries classification system. Clin Oral Investig 2003;7(1):32-7.
  6. Horiguchi S, Yamada T, Inokoshi S, et al. Selective caries removal with air abrasion. Oper Dent 1998;23(5):236–43.
  7. Nielsen AG, Richards JR, Wolcott RB. Ultrasonic dental cutting instrument: I. J Am Dent Assoc 1955;50(4):392-9.
  8. Banerjee A, Kidd EA, Watson TF. Scanning electron microscopic observations of human dentine after mechanical caries excavation. J Dent 2000;28(3):179-86.
  9. Bassi G, Chawla S, Patel M. The Nd:YAG laser in caries removal. Br Dent J 1994;177(7):248-50.
  10. Ericson D, Zimmerman M, Raber H, et al. Clinical evaluation of efficacy and safety of a new method for chemo-mechanical removal of caries. A multi-centre study. Caries Res 1999;33(3):171-7.
  11. Baneerjee A, Kidd EA, Watson TF. In vitro evaluation of five alternative methods of carious dentin excavation. Caries Res 2000;34(2):144–50.
  12. Avinash A, Grover SD, Koul M, et al. Comparison of mechanical and chemomechanical methods of caries removal in deciduous and permanent teeth: A SEM study J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2012;30(2):115-21.
  13. Nalawade HS, Lele GS, Walimbe HS. Comparative evaluation of efficacy of chemomechanical and conventional methods of caries excavation in young permanent molar teeth: In vivo study. J Dent Res Rev 2019;6(1):13-8.
  14. Elkholany NR, Abdelaziz KM, Zaghloul NM, et al. Chemomechanical method: a valuable alternative for caries removal. J Minim Interv Dent 2002;2(4):248-59.
  15. Beeley JA, Yip HK, Stevenson AG. Chemo-chemical caries removal-A review of the techniques and latest developments. Br Dent J 2000;188(8):427-30.
  16. Sudsangiam S, Van Noort R. Do dentin bond strength tests serve a useful purpose. J Adhes Dent 1999;1(1):57-67.
  17. Allen KL, Salgado TL, Janal MN, et al. Removing carious dentin using a polymer instrument without anesthesia versus a carbide bur with anesthesia. J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136(5):643 51.
  18. Soni HK, Sharma A, Sood PB. A comparative clinical study of various methods of caries removal in children. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2015;16:19 26.
  19. Tay FR, Pashley DH. Dental adhesives of the future. J Adhes Dent 2002;4(2):91–103.
  20. Arvidsson A, Liedberg B, Moller K, et al. Chemical and topographical analyses of dentine surfaces after CariSolv treatment. J Dent 2002;30(2-3):67–75.
  21. Bittencourt ST, Pereira JR, Rosa AW, et al. Mineral content removal after Papacarie application in primary teeth: a quantitative analysis. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2010;34(3):229-31.
  22. Sakoolnamarka R, Burrow MF, Swain M, et al. Microhardness and Ca:P ratio of carious and CariSolv treated cariesaffected dentine using an ultra-micro-indentation system and energy dispersive analysis of x-rays–a pilot study. Aust Dent J 2005;50(4):246–50.
  23. Hamama H, Yiu C, Burrow M, et al. Chemical, morphological and microhardness changes of dentine after chemomechanical caries removal. Aust Dent J 2013;58(3):283-92.
  24. Banerjee A, Sherriff M, Kidd EA, et al. A confocal microscopic study relating the autoflfluorescence of carious dentine to its microhardness. Br Dent J 1999;187(4):206–10.
  25. Hossain M, Nakamura Y, Tamaki Y, et al. Dentinal composition and Knoop hardness measurements of cavity flfloor following carious dentin removal with CariSolv. Oper Dent 2003;28(4):346–51.
  26. Banerjee A, Kellow S, Mannocci F, et al. An in vitro evaluation of microtensile bond strengths of two adhesive bonding agents to residual dentine after caries removal using three excavation techniques. J Dent 2010;38(6):480–9.
  27. Magalhaes CS, Moreira AN, Campos WR, et al. Effectiveness and effificiency of chemomechanical carious dentin removal. Braz Dent J 2006;17:63–7.