Effectiveness of the Microlux/DLTM Chemiluminescence Device in Screening of Potentially Malignant and Malignant Oral Lesions

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the effectiveness of Microlux/DL with and without toluidine blue in screening of potentially malignant and malignant oral lesions. Materials and Methods: In this diagnostic clinical trial clinical examination was carried out by two teams: 1) two oral medicine consultants, and 2) two general dentists. Participants were randomly and blindly allocated for each examining team. A total of 599 tobacco users were assessed through conventional oral examination (COE); the examination was then repeated using Microlux/DL device and toluidine blue. Biopsy of suspicious lesions was performed. Also clinicians opinions regarding the two tools were obtained. Results: The sensitivity and, specificity and positive predictive value (PVP) of Microlux/DL for visualization of suspicious premalignant lesions considering COE as a gold standard (i.e screening device) were 94.3%, 99.6% and 96.2% respectively, while they were 100%, 32.4% and 17.9% when considering biopsy as a gold standard. Moreover, Microlux/DL enhanced detection of the lesion and uncovered new lesions compared to COE, whereas it did not alter the provisional clinical diagnosis, or alter the biopsy site. On the other hand, adding toluidine blue dye did not improve the effectiveness of the Microlux/DL system. Conclusions: The Microlux/DL seems to be a promising adjunctive screening device.

Differential diagnosis of leukoplakia versus lichen planus of the oral mucosa based on digital texture analysis in intraoral photography

“…28 Ibrahim et al found that the sensitivity was 100% and the specificity was 32.4% in the visualization of suspicious premalignant lesions using Microlux/DL. 29 In our study, the sensitivity of leukoplakia detection was 57%, which was lower than in the abovementioned results, but the specificity of 74% was significantly higher than the ViziLite ® application by Sambandham et al Honsi et al used image cytometry to determine DNA ploidy in LP. The most common degree of DNA ploidy in LP lesions was diploidy.…”

An Overview on Current Non-invasive Diagnostic Devices in Oral Oncology

“…Altered epithelial cells cause the appearance of “aceto-white” lesions, and LED light source makes the lesion more easily recognisable. Furthermore, the use of TB can be used in conjunction with Microlux/DL TM , to enhance the visualisation of dysplastic areas ( Ibrahim et al, 2014 ). In 2009 was conducted a study on 50 patients with oral white lesions to evaluate the efficacy of Microlux/DL TM .…”

Non-Invasive Techniques for Detection and Diagnosis of Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders

“…8-94.3 70.7-99.6 (McIntosh et al 2009;Ibrahim et al 2014) Orascoptic DK n/a n/a (Patton et al 2008) VELscope 30-100 15-100 (Poh et al 2006;Balevi 2007;Patton et al 2008;Trullenque-Eriksson et al 2009;Mehrotra et al 2010;Moro et al 2010;Awan et al 2011a;Balevi 2011;Fricain 2011;Lopez-Jornet and De la Mano-Espinosa 2011;Scheer et al 2011;Farah et al 2012;Marzouki et al 2012;Bhatia et al 2013) Photodynamic diagnosis 79-100 50-99 (Leunig et al 2000;Betz et al 2002;Zheng et al 2002;Chang and Wilder-Smith 2005;Sharwani et al 2006a;Driemel et al 2007;Sieron et al 2008) Optical diagnostic technologies…”

“…The oral cavity is examined with a battery-powered LED fiber-optic source that emits a blue-white light (Patton et al 2008;Ibrahim et al 2014). Few studies have been published on its effectiveness in oral PMD diagnosis (McIntosh et al 2009).…”

“…Few studies have been published on its effectiveness in oral PMD diagnosis (McIntosh et al 2009). In a study of 599 tobacco users, using biopsy as the gold standard, the sensitivity and specificity of Microlux/DL in detecting oral PMDs were 100% and 32.4%, which indicated that it seemed useful for enhancing lesion visibility, but couldn't discriminate between benign and malignant lesions (Ibrahim et al 2014). Microlux/DL is also a poor discriminator for inflammatory, traumatic, and malignant lesions (McIntosh et al 2009).…”