Juntavee et al. (2013) [23]
|
Primary second molars with occlusal caries
|
In vitro comparative study
|
- Influence of Apacaries gel, Er:YAG laser, and spoon excavator as caries removal methods in the marginal microleakage of glass ionomer restorations
|
- Pulse energy: 260mJ
- Frequency: 30Hz
- Pulse mode
|
- the Er:YAG laser promoted significant higher microleakage than Apacaries and spoon excavator in ionomer restorations
|
Katirci et al. (2016) [28]
|
Permanent molars with occlusal caries
|
In vitro comparative study
|
- Effectiveness of three caries removal methods by stereomicroscopic observations and microindentation hardness measurement
- Chemical composition of the residual dentin
|
- Pulse energy: 250mJ
- Frequency: 4Hz
- Non-contact mode
- Working distance: 10mm
|
- Carbide bur and Er:YAG laser had a similar outcome regarding caries removal
- Carisolv® was less effective than the carbide bur and the Er:YAG laser and presented remaining dentin with a lower hardness compared to the other methods
- There were no differences in the calcium and phosphate ratio among the three methods
|
Kornblit et al. (2008) [2]
|
30 carious teeth from children aged 4 to 12s
|
Clinical trial
|
- Possible postoperative complications after caries removal with the Er:YAG laser
|
- Wavelength: 2.94µm
- Pulse duration: 140µs
- Pulse energy: 120 to 200mJ
- Frequency: 2 to 20Hz
- focus mode
- Working distance: 0.8 to 1cm
|
- Children treated with Er:YAG did not show any pain or sensitivity 7 and 28 days after the treatment
|
Krause et al. (2008) [15]
|
79 carious lesions from children aged 3 to 12
|
Clinical trial
|
- Efficacy of the FCC Er:YAG laser
- CFU count after laser treatment
- Children perceptions during treatment
|
- Wavelength: 2.94µm
- Pulse duration: 400µs
- Pulse energy: 250mJ
- Frequency: 4Hz
- non-contact mode
- Working distance: 12cm
- Threshold: 7U
|
- Treatment duration was 2.3±1.2 min
- 93.8% of the children considered the laser treatment comfortable
- After laser ablation, 42.9% of the samples showed residual bacteria; however, only 7.1% presented more than 100 CFU/sample
|
Li et al. (2019) [32]
|
Carious teeth from children
|
Meta-analysis
|
- Duration of treatment
- Pain perception
- Success of restorations
|
- Caries removal with laser is more time consuming than the use of bur
- the Er:YAG laser is less painful than -the bur
- There were no statistical differences in complete restoration retention, marginal discoloration, and marginal adaptation between Er:YAG laser and bur
|
Matsumoto et al. (2007) [36]
|
Carious teeth from adults
|
Clinical trial
|
- Pain, discomfort, assessment during cavity preparation, prognosis factor, and overall clinical evaluation
|
- Wavelength: 2.94µm
- Pulse energy: 700mJ
- Frequency: 8Hz
|
- Laser showed: low rate of pain during treatment, no discomfort, ample efficacy, substantial efficiency, good prognosis after three months of follow-up, and mean of treatment duration of 49s
|
Medioni et al. (2016) [35]
|
Carious molars and premolars
|
In vitro comparative study
|
- Effectiveness of - the Er:YAG laser, carbide bur, and polymer bur for caries removal
|
- Wavelength: 2.94µm
- Pulse energy: 375mJ
- Pulse duration: 50µs
- Frequency: 10Hz
- Quasi-contact mode
|
- Procedure time was similar for all the three methods
- Histological analysis showed smear layer in the specimens treated with carbide bur, denatured collagen in the laser group, and a layer of affected dentin in the polymer bur group
- All methods removed the infected dentin
|
Neves et al. (2011) [24]
|
Carious molarss
|
In vitro comparative study
|
- Influence of the 7 methods for caries removal in the bonding capacity of the remaining dentin
|
- Pulse energy: 250mJ
- Pulse repetition rate: 4 pulses/s
- Non-contact mode
- Threshold: 7U
|
- Remaining denting from the FCC Er:YAG laser group showed lower µTBS values
- Carisolv® showed the best results regarding µTBS, followed by carbide bur + caries detector
|