Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing the reliability of a new fluorescence camera with conventional laser fluorescence devices in detecting caries lesions in occlusal and smooth surfaces of primary teeth

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Lasers in Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aims of this in vitro study were (1) to compare the reliability of a new fluorescence camera (FC; VistaProof) with that of two other laser fluorescence devices (DIAGNOdent and DIAGNOdent pen) in assessing smooth and occlusal caries lesions in primary teeth and (2) to determine the influence of the spacer, the protective cover and air drying on the FC readings. We selected 129 primary molars which were divided into two groups: smooth surfaces (n=68) and occlusal surfaces (n=61). Two trained examiners performed the evaluations using the FC and the other laser fluorescence devices separately. One examiner repeated all assessments after 1 week. Inter- and intraexaminer reproducibility was calculated from the absolute values derived from the devices using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis. Pearson correlation was performed among the values obtained with the different devices. For aim 2, only teeth from the occlusal surface group were used. Another examiner performed measurements with the FC, varying the size of the spacer, the use of the plastic protective cover and the drying time (0, 3 and 15 s). Wilcoxon’s test was used to compare these measurements. High values of interexaminer ICC were observed with the FC in both experiments. However, the highest intraexaminer ICC for smooth surfaces was found for the DIAGNOdent (ICC 0.918). A positive correlation between all methods was observed in both studies. Only drying for 15 s significantly increased the FC readings. In conclusion, the FC showed high reliability for occlusal and smooth surfaces, similar to the other fluorescence methods tested. Additionally, prolonged air drying increased the FC measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bader JD, Shugars DA (2004) A systematic review of the performance of a laser fluorescence device for detecting caries. J Am Dent Assoc 135:1413–1426

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hibst R, Paulus R, Lussi A (2001) Detection of occlusal caries by laser fluorescence: basic and clinical investigations. Med Laser Appl 16:205–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Thoms M (2006) Detection of intraoral lesions using a fluorescence camera. In: Rechmann P, Fried D (eds) Proceedings of the SPIE, vol. 6137 – Lasers in Dentistry XII, 613705, pp 37–43

  4. Lussi A, Hellwig E (2006) Performance of a new laser fluorescence device for the detection of occlusal caries in vitro. J Dent 34:467–471

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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 43:36–42

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rodrigues JA, Hug I, Diniz MB, Lussi A (2008) Performance of fluorescence methods, radiographic examination and ICDAS II on occlusal surfaces in vitro. Caries Res 42:297–304

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Diniz MB, Rodrigues JA, de Paula AB, Cordeiro Rde C (2009) In vivo evaluation of laser fluorescence performance using different cut-off limits for occlusal caries detection. Lasers Med Sci 24:295–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rodrigues JA, Diniz MB, Josgrilberg EB, Cordeiro RC (2009) In vitro comparison of laser fluorescence performance with visual examination for detection of occlusal caries in permanent and primary molars. Lasers Med Sci 24:501–506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Francescut P, Zimmerli B, Lussi A (2006) Influence of different storage methods on laser fluorescence values: a two-year study. Caries Res 40:181–185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 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. Caries Res 38:104–108

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Baelum V, Machiulskiene V, Nyvad B, Richards A, Vaeth M (2003) Application of survival analysis to carious lesion transitions in intervention trials. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 31:252–260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Aljehani A, Yang L, Shi XQ (2007) In vitro quantification of smooth surface caries with DIAGNOdent and the DIAGNOdent pen. Acta Odontol Scand 65:60–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Diniz MB, Leme AF, Cardoso KD, Rodrigues JD, Cordeiro RD (2009) The efficacy of laser fluorescence to detect in vitro demineralization and remineralization of smooth enamel surfaces. Photomed Laser Surg 27:57–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kuhnisch J, Bucher K, Henschel V, Hickel R (2007) Reproducibility of DIAGNOdent 2095 and DIAGNOdent Pen measurements: results from an in vitro study on occlusal sites. Eur J Oral Sci 115:206–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lin LI (1989) A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45:255–268

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kuhnisch J, Ziehe A, Brandstadt A, Heinrich-Weltzien R (2004) An in vitro study of the reliability of DIAGNOdent measurements. J Oral Rehabil 31:895–899

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kuhnisch J, Bucher K, Hickel R (2007) The intra/inter-examiner reproducibility of the new DIAGNOdent Pen on occlusal sites. J Dent 35:509–512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Buchalla W (2005) Comparative fluorescence spectroscopy shows differences in noncavitated enamel lesions. Caries Res 39:150–156

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mendes FM, Pinheiro SL, Bengtson AL (2004) Effect of alteration in organic material of the occlusal caries on DIAGNOdent readings. Braz Oral Res 18:141–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Alencar CJ, Braga MM, de Oliveira E, Nicolau J, Mendes FM (2009) Dye-enhanced laser fluorescence detection of caries lesions around brackets. Lasers Med Sci 24:865–870

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wenzel A, Frandsen E, Hintze H (1999) Patient discomfort and cross-infection control in bitewing examination with a storage phosphor plate and a CCD-based sensor. J Dent 27:243–246

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cabral RM, Mendes FM, Nicolau J, Zezell DM (2006) The influence of PVC seal wrap and probe tips autoclaving on the in vitro performance of laser fluorescence device in occlusal caries in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 30:306–309

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lussi A, Longbottom C, Gygax M, Braig F (2005) Influence of professional cleaning and drying of occlusal surfaces on laser fluorescence in vivo. Caries Res 39:284–286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The study was supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq, Process no. 476372/2006-2) and Pró-Reitoria de Pesquisa da USP. We would also like to thank all the participants in the Seminar of the Department of Pediatric Dentistry of the School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, for their valuable suggestions. The authors do not have any conflicting financial interests with any company cited in the article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    Monique Saveriano De Benedetto, Caroline Carvalho Morais, Tatiane Fernandes Novaes, Mariana Minatel Braga & Fausto Medeiros Mendes

  2. Faculdade de Odontologia São Leopoldo Mandic, Campinas, Brazil

    Monique Saveriano De Benedetto

  3. School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    Jonas de Almeida Rodrigues

  4. Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Lineu Prestes, 2227, São Paulo, SP, Brazil, 05508-000

    Fausto Medeiros Mendes

Authors
  1. Monique Saveriano De Benedetto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caroline Carvalho Morais
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tatiane Fernandes Novaes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jonas de Almeida Rodrigues
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mariana Minatel Braga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fausto Medeiros Mendes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fausto Medeiros Mendes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

De Benedetto, M.S., Morais, C.C., Novaes, T.F. et al. Comparing the reliability of a new fluorescence camera with conventional laser fluorescence devices in detecting caries lesions in occlusal and smooth surfaces of primary teeth. Lasers Med Sci 26, 157–162 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-010-0757-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-010-0757-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation