Journal of Scientific Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 2 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2012 ) > List of Articles

SHORT COMMUNICATION

Comparative Evaluation of Two Commercially Available Polymer Burs for their Efficacy on Dentinal Caries Removal -Split tooth study using Polarized Light Microscopy

Carounanidy Usha, Ranjani R

Keywords : caries, dentinal, residual caries, polymer bur, step-wise excavation method, polarized light microscopy

Citation Information : Usha C, R R. Comparative Evaluation of Two Commercially Available Polymer Burs for their Efficacy on Dentinal Caries Removal -Split tooth study using Polarized Light Microscopy. 2012; 2 (2):66-69.

DOI: 10.5005/jsd-2-2-66

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-12-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: Ultra conservative caries removal now has become an integral part of Minimal Invasive Dentistry. The main objective of deep caries removal is to conserve the tooth structure as well to maintain the integrity of the health of the pulp. Recently burs made of polymers have been proposed as alternatives for metallic burs to selectively remove caries in dentin. Aims: This in vitro, split-tooth, comparative study evaluated the efficacy of two commercially available Polymer burs, namely Poly bur- I (Komet) and Smart prep bur (SS White) for their efficacy in removing deep dentinal carious lesions. The time taken for caries removal was also assessed. Methodology: IO extracted carious mandibular molars were split into buccal and lingual halves. Caries in one half(n= IO) was removed by Poly bur -I (Komet) and in the other half(n= IO) by Smart prep bur (SS white). They were then sectioned in the hard tissue microtome, subsequently manually thinned out and were mounted for evaluation under Polarized Light Microscopy. Results: The qualitative evaluation of the micro graphs revealed that both the polymer burs were equally effective in removing the deep dentinal caries. However the time taken by Poly bur- I was lesser than the Smart prep bur.


PDF Share
  1. Roberson TM. Cariology: The lesion, etiology, prevention and control. In. Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift EJ, editors. Sturdevant's Art and Scince of Operative Dentistry. 5th ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby; 2006. pp 71-80.
  2. Ricketts DNJ, Pitts NB. Novel operative treatment Options. In: Pitts NB (ed): Detection, Assessment, Diagnosis and Monitoring of Caries. Monogr Oral Sci. Basel, Karger, 2009:21, pp 174--187.
  3. Dammaschke T, Rodenberg TN, Schäfer E, Ott KHR. Efficiency of the polymer bur Smart Prep compared with conventional tungsten carbide bud ur in dentin caries excavation. Oper Dent 2006;31 (2):256-60.
  4. Hauman CH, Kuzmanovic DV: An evaluation of polymer rotary instruments' ability to remove healthy, non-carious dentine. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2007;15:77-80.
  5. Meller C, Welk A, Zeligowski T, Splieth C: Comparison of dentin caries excavation with polymer and tungsten carbide burs. Quintessence Int 2007;38:565-69.
  6. Banerjee A, Kidd EA, Watson TF. In vitro evaluation of five alternative methods of carious dentine excavation. Caries Res 2000;34(2): 144-50.
  7. Ricketts DNJ, Pitts NB. Traditional Operative Treatment Options. In: Pitts NB (ed): Detection, Assessment, Diagnosis and Monitoring of Caries. Mono gr Oral Sci. Basel, Karger, 2009:21, pp 164--73.
  8. Kidd EAM, van Amerongen JP, van Amerongen WE. The role of operative treatment in caries control. In: Fejerskov 0, Kidd E, Nyvad B, Baelum V, editors. Dental Caries-The disease and its clinical management. 2nd ed. Blackwell Munksgaard Ltd; 2008. pp 356-65.
  9. Hayashi M, Fujitani M, Yamaki C, Momoi Y. Ways of enhancing pulp preservation by stepwise excavation -a systematic review. J Dent 201l;39(2):95-107.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.