Advertisement

In vitro visual and visible light transillumination methods for detection of natural non-cavitated approximal caries

  • N. Abogazalah
  • G. J. Eckert
  • Masatoshi Ando
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives

The objective was to evaluate a visible-light-transillumination (using Digital Imaging Fiber-Optic Transillumination machine: DIFOTI) method using occlusal view (DIFOTI-occl), axial view (buccal and lingual: DIFOTI-axial), and combination of all views (DIFOTI-all) for detecting non-cavitated approximal caries and to compare its performance to visual examination (International Caries Detection and Assessment System: ICDAS).

Materials and methods

Thirty extracted human premolars were selected (sound to lesions into the outer one-third of the dentine) based on micro-computed tomography (μ-CT). Teeth were mounted in a custom-made device to simulate approximal contact. DIFOTI (Electro-Optical Sciences Inc., Irvington, NY, USA) images were obtained from the occlusal, buccal, and lingual views. DIFOTI image and ICDAS examinations were performed and repeated by three trained/calibrated examiners. Sensitivity, specificity, area under receiver operating characteristics curve (Az), inter- and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), and correlation were determined.

Results

Sensitivity/specificity was for DIFOTI-occl: 0.42/0.75, DIFOTI-axial: 0.86/0.93, DIFOTI-all: 0.91/0.69, and for ICDAS: 0.89/0.83. Az for DIFOTI-occl was significantly lower than that of DIFOTI-axial (p < 0.001), DIFOTI-all (p = 0.002), and ICDAS (p = 0.005). Spearman correlation coefficients with μ-CT for DIFOTI-occl (r = 0.39) showed weak association, while DIFOTI-axial (r = 0.80), DIFOTI-all (r = 0.91), and ICDAS (r = 0.90) showed moderate association. ICCs for intra-examiner repeatability/inter-examiner agreement were for DIFOTI-occl (0.64/0.58), DIFOTI-axial (0.92/0.89), DIFOTI-all (0.85/0.83), and ICDAS (0.79/0.72).

Conclusions

The results of the current in vitro study suggest that, for detection of non-cavitated approximal caries lesions, DIFOTI performs better using axial than occlusal view.

Clinical relevance

Approximal non-cavitated caries detection is challenging. DIFOTI can observe images from occlusal-, buccal-, and lingual views. DIFOTI and visual (ICDAS) examinations of buccal- and lingual- and all-views are more suitable than those of occlusal view for a detection of non-cavitated approximal caries.

Keywords

Approximal caries Caries detection Visible light transillumination International caries detection and assessment system (ICDAS) Non-cavitated caries lesion Imaging geometry Digital imaging transillumination DIFOTI 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Drs. Anderson Hara and Ana Gossweiler, Indiana University School of Dentistry (IUSD), to participate in this study as examiners. We thank Dr. James C Williams, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine for the assistance with Skyscan microfocus computed tomography. This study was conducted in Indiana University School of Dentistry, USA. This work was supported by Indiana University School of Dentistry, Department of Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public Health, 2016; and by Dental Master’s Thesis Award Program from Delta Dental Foundation (Okemos, MI, 2016). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The roles of authors were: conceived and designed the experiment: N. Abogazalah, G.J. Eckert; and M. Ando; performed examinations: N. Abogazalah and M. Ando; perform statistical analyses: G.J. Eckert; and wrote the paper: N. Abogazalah, G.J. Eckert; and M. Ando.

Funding

The work was supported by the Dental Master’s Thesis Award Program from Delta Dental Foundation.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Kassebaum NJ, Smith AGC, Bernabe E, Fleming TD, Reynolds AE, Vos T, Murray CJL, Marcenes W, Collaborators GBDOH (2017) Global, regional, and National Prevalence, incidence, and disability-adjusted life years for oral conditions for 195 countries, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the global burden of diseases, injuries, and risk factors. J Dent Res 96(4):380–387.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034517693566 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pitts NB, Zero DT, Marsh PD, Ekstrand K, Weintraub JA, Ramos-Gomez F, Tagami J, Twetman S, Tsakos G, Ismail A (2017) Dental caries. Nat Rev Dis Primers 3:17030.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2017.30 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zero DT, Fontana M, Martinez-Mier EA, Ferreira-Zandona A, Ando M, Gonzalez-Cabezas C, Bayne S (2009) The biology, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of dental caries: scientific advances in the United States. J Am Dent Assoc 140(Suppl 1):25S–34SCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ismail AI, Sohn W, Tellez M, Amaya A, Sen A, Hasson H, Pitts NB (2007) The international caries detection and assessment system (ICDAS): an integrated system for measuring dental caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 35(3):170–178.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00347.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ekstrand KR, Kuzmina I, Bjorndal L, Thylstrup A (1995) Relationship between external and histologic features of progressive stages of caries in the occlusal fossa. Caries Res 29(4):243–250CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ismail A (2004) Diagnostic levels in dental public health planning. Caries Res 38(3):199–203.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000077755 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bin-Shuwaish M, Yaman P, Dennison J, Neiva G (2008) The correlation of DIFOTI to clinical and radiographic images in class II carious lesions. J Am Dent Assoc 139(10):1374–1381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Friedman J, Marcus MI (1970) Transillumination of the oral cavity with use of fiber optics. J Am Dent Assoc 80(4):801–809CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schneiderman A, Elbaum M, Shultz T, Keem S, Greenebaum M, Driller J (1997) Assessment of dental caries with digital imaging Fiber-optic TransIllumination (DIFOTI): in vitro study. Caries Res 31(2):103–110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kuhnisch J, Sochtig F, Pitchika V, Laubender R, Neuhaus KW, Lussi A, Hickel R (2016) In vivo validation of near-infrared light transillumination for interproximal dentin caries detection. Clin Oral Investig 20(4):821–829.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1559-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ekstrand KR, Ricketts DN, Kidd EA (1997) Reproducibility and accuracy of three methods for assessment of demineralization depth of the occlusal surface: an in vitro examination. Caries Res 31(3):224–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wenzel A, Borg E, Hintze H, Grondahl HG (1995) Accuracy of caries diagnosis in digital images from charge-coupled device and storage phosphor systems: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 24(4):250–254.  https://doi.org/10.1038/dmfr.24.4.9161170 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ando M Perforance of digital imaging Fiber-optic Transilluminaton (DIFOTI) for detection of non-cavitated primary caries. Preliminary report. In: Stookey G, Kambara M (eds) 83rd International Association for Dental Research symposium : early detection of dental caries, Baltimore, Maryland, march, 11 2005. Therametric technologies Inc., Indianapolis, pp 41–52Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Astvaldsdottir A, Ahlund K, Holbrook WP, de Verdier B, Tranaeus S (2012) Approximal caries detection by DIFOTI: in vitro comparison of diagnostic accuracy/efficacy with film and digital radiography. Int J Dent 2012:326401.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/326401 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Darling CL, Fried D (2008) Real-time near IR (1310 nm) imaging of CO2 laser ablation of enamel. Opt Express 16(4):2685–2693CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Takei HH (1980) The interdental space. Dent Clin N Am 24(2):169–176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fried D, Featherstone JD, Darling CL, Jones RS, Ngaotheppitak P, Buhler CM (2005) Early caries imaging and monitoring with near-infrared light. Dent Clin N Am 49(4):771–793, vi.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2005.05.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lara-Capi C, Cagetti MG, Lingstrom P, Lai G, Cocco F, Simark-Mattsson C, Campus G (2017) Digital transillumination in caries detection versus radiographic and clinical methods: an in-vivo study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 46(4):20160417.  https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160417 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Abogazalah N, Eckert GJ, Ando M (2017) In vitro performance of near infrared light transillumination at 780-nm and digital radiography for detection of non-cavitated approximal caries. J Dent 63:44–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.05.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Staninec M, Lee C, Darling CL, Fried D (2010) In vivo near-IR imaging of approximal dental decay at 1,310 nm. Lasers Surg Med 42(4):292–298.  https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.20913 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Braga MM, Morais CC, Nakama RC, Leamari VM, Siqueira WL, Mendes FM (2009) In vitro performance of methods of approximal caries detection in primary molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 108(4):e35–e41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.05.017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mitropoulos P, Rahiotis C, Stamatakis H, Kakaboura A (2010) Diagnostic performance of the visual caries classification system ICDAS II versus radiography and micro-computed tomography for proximal caries detection: an in vitro study. J Dent 38(11):859–867.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.07.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shoaib L, Deery C, Ricketts DN, Nugent ZJ (2009) Validity and reproducibility of ICDAS II in primary teeth. Caries Res 43(6):442–448.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000258551 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gimenez T, Piovesan C, Braga MM, Raggio DP, Deery C, Ricketts DN, Ekstrand KR, Mendes FM (2015) Visual inspection for caries detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res 94(7):895–904.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034515586763 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Novaes TF, Matos R, Raggio DP, Imparato JC, Braga MM, Mendes FM (2010) Influence of the discomfort reported by children on the performance of approximal caries detection methods. Caries Res 44(5):465–471.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000320266 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Novaes TF, Matos R, Braga MM, Imparato JC, Raggio DP, Mendes FM (2009) Performance of a pen-type laser fluorescence device and conventional methods in detecting approximal caries lesions in primary teeth--in vivo study. Caries Res 43(1):36–42.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000189705 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    ten Bosch JJ (1996) Light scattering and related methods in caries diagnosis. In: Stookey GK (ed) The first annual Indiana Conference. Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, pp 81–90Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public HealthIndiana University School of DentistryIndianapolisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Restorative Dental SciencesKing Khalid University College of DentistryAbhaSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.Department of BiostatisticsIndiana University School of MedicineIndianapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations