Advertisement

Lasers in Medical Science

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 501–506 | Cite as

In vitro comparison of laser fluorescence performance with visual examination for detection of occlusal caries in permanent and primary molars

  • Jonas A. RodriguesEmail author
  • Michele B. Diniz
  • Érika B. Josgrilberg
  • Rita C. L. Cordeiro
Original Article

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the DIAGNOdent 2095 with visual examination for occlusal caries detection in permanent and primary molars. The sample comprised 148 permanent human molars and 179 primary human molars. The samples were measured and visually examined three times by two examiners. After measurement, the teeth were histologically prepared and assessed for caries extension. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve were calculated. Intra-class correlation (ICC), unweighted kappa and the Bland and Altman method were used to assess inter- and intra-examiner reproducibility. DIAGNOdent showed higher specificity and lower sensitivity than did visual examination. The ICC values indicated an excellent agreement between the examinations. Kappa values varied from good to excellent for DIAGNOdent but from poor to good for visual examination. In conclusion, the DIAGNOdent may be a useful adjunct to conventional methods for occlusal caries detection.

Keywords

Primary teeth Permanent teeth Laser fluorescence DIAGNOdent Visual examination Occlusal caries detection 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the Bank of Teeth (Faculty of Dentistry, University of São Paulo), for donation of the teeth, and the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) for financial support. This study was submitted to the School of Dentistry of Araraquara (São Paulo State University, UNESP, Brazil), as a requirement for the Master’s degree in Pediatric Dentistry.

References

  1. 1.
    Mendes FM, Oliveira E, Faria DLA, Nicolau J (2006) Ability of laser fluorescence device associated with fluorescent dyes in detecting and quantifying early smooth surface caries lesions. J Biomed Opt 11:024007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shi XQ, Tranaeus S, Angmar-Månsson B (2001) Validation of DIAGNOdent for quantification of smooth-surface caries: an in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 59:74–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tranaeus S, Shi X-Q, Angmar-Mansson B (2005) Caries risk assessment: methods available to clinicians for caries detection. Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol 33:265–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lussi A, Imwinkelried S, Pitts NB, Longbotton C, Reich E (1999) Performance and reproducibility of a laser fluorescence system for detection of occlusal caries in vitro. Caries Res 33:261–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lussi A, Megert B, Longbottom C, Reich E, Francescut P (2001) Clinical performance device for detection of occlusal caries lesion. Eur J Oral Sci 109:14–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lussi A, Francescut P (2003) Performance of conventional and new methods for the detection of occlusal caries. Caries Res 37:2–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mendes FM, Siqueira WL, Mazzitelli JF, Pinheiro SL, Bengtson AL (2005) Performance of DIAGNOdent for detection and quantification of smooth-surface caries in primary teeth. J Dent 33:79–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lussi A, Hellwig E (2006) Performance of a new laser fluorescence device for the detection of occlusal caries in vitro. J Dent 34:467–471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rodrigues JA, Vita TM, Cordeiro RCL (2008) In vitro evaluation of the influence of aluminum oxide air abrasion of pits and fissures on detection of occlusal caries lesions in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 30:15–18Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hibst R, Paulus R, Lussi A (2001) A detection of occlusal caries by laser fluorescence: basic and clinical investigations. Med Laser Appl 16:295–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bader JD, Shugars DA (2004) A systematic review of the performance of a laser fluorescence device for detecting caries. J Am Dent Assoc 135:1414–1426Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mendes FM, Hissadomi M, Imparato JCP (2004) Effects of drying time and the presence of plaque on the in vitro performance of laser fluorescence in occlusal caries of primary teeth. Car Res 38:104–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sheehy EC, Brailsford SR, Kidd EA, Beighton D, Zoitopoulos L (2001) Comparison between visual examination and a laser fluorescence system for in vivo diagnosis of occlusal caries. Caries Res 35:421–426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lussi A, Reich E (2005) The influence of toothpastes and prophylaxis pastes on fluorescence measurements for caries detection. Eur J Oral Sci 113:141–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shi XQ, Welander U, Angmar-Mansson B (2000) Occlusal caries detection with KaVo Diagnodent and radiography: an in vitro comparison. Caries Res 34:151–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lin LIK (1989) A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45:255–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fleis IL (1981) Statistical methods for rates and proportions, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 212–225Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 11:07–308Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ekstrand KR, Martignon S, Ricketts DJN, Qvist V (2007) Detection and activity assessment of primary coronal caries lesions: a methodologic study. Oper Dent 32:225–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alwas-Danowska HM, Plasschaert AJ, Suliborski S, Verdonschot EH (2002) Reliability and validity issues of laser fluorescence measurements in occlusal caries diagnosis. J Dent 30:129–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Souza-Zaroni WC, Ciccone JC, Souza-Gabriel AE, Ramos RP, Corona SAM, Palma-Dibb RG (2006) Validity and reproducibility of different combinations of methods for occlusal caries detection: an in vitro comparison. Caries Res 40:194–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alkurt MT, Peker I, Arisu HC, Bala O, Altunkaynak B (2007) In vivo comparison of laser fluorescence measurements with conventional methods for occlusal caries detection. Lasers Med Sci. DOI  10.1007/s10103–007–0486–2
  23. 23.
    Kühnisch J, Bücher K, Henschel V, Reinhard H (2007a) Reproducibility of DIAGNOdent 2095 and DIAGNOdent Pen measurements: results from a in vitro study on occlusal sites. Eur J Oral Sci 115:206–211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kühnisch J, Bücher K, Reinhard H (2007) The intra/inter examiner reproducibility of the new DIAGNOdent Pen on occlusal caries sites. J Dent 35:509–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reis A, Mendes FM, Angnes V, Angnes G, Grande RH, Loguercio AD (2006) Performance of methods of occlusal caries detection in permanent teeth under clinical and laboratory conditions. J Dent 34:89–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fung L, Smales R, Ngo H, Moun G (2004) Diagnostic comparison of three groups of examiners using visual and laser fluorescence methods to detect occlusal caries in vitro. Aust Dent J 49:67–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Basssani DG, Miranda LA, Gustafsson A (2007) Use of the limits of agreement approach in periodontology. Oral Health Prev Dent 5:119–124Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonas A. Rodrigues
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Michele B. Diniz
    • 1
  • Érika B. Josgrilberg
    • 1
  • Rita C. L. Cordeiro
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pediatric DentistryFaculty of Dentistry of Araraquara, São Paulo State University (UNESP)AraraquaraBrazil
  2. 2.Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara - Departamento de Clínica InfantilAraraquaraBrazil

Personalised recommendations