Primary study · included by 1 review

Assessment of chemomechanical removal of carious lesions using Papacarie Duo™: randomized longitudinal clinical trial.

Matsumoto 2013 · Matsumoto Simone Ferreira Borges, Motta Lara Jansiski, Alfaya Thays Almeida, et al. · Indian journal of dental research : official publication of Indian Society for Dental Research · 2013

Included by

Comparative efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal and conventional mechanical caries removal for the treatment of primary molar caries in children: a meta-analysis.

Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2026 · cited as Matsumoto 2013 · Table 1; reference list

Outcome this study informs	Pooled effect	Evidence	Certainty
Pain (binary: no pain or comfort) Chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR), any agent vs Conventional mechanical caries removal (bur, curette or polymer bur)	OR 3.35 [1.01, 11.17]	5 studies · 260 participants	High
Pain, no pain (comfort) rate Any chemomechanical caries removal gel (BRIX3000, Carisolv, Carie Care, Papacarie/Papacarie DUO) vs Conventional mechanical caries removal (rotary bur, curette/spoon excavator or polymer bur)	OR 2.85 [1.61, 5.04]	5 studies · 260 participants	High

1 including review in total.