Forensic applications: Fluorescence properties of tooth-coloured restorative materials using a fluorescence DSLR camera

Kiran, Ramya; Walsh, L. J.; Forrest, Alex Stewart; Tennant, Marc; Chapman, James

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.01.022

Cited by 18 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Variations occur between brands of RBC, and also between shades of the same material (as shown in Table ). It is important to note that the majority of RBC materials fluoresce brighter than tooth substance . In this study, two RBCs (GRADIA DIRECT X and Dentsply TPH Spectra LV) and an ormocer (Admira Fusion) were used.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Note : Data for fluorescence luminosity under illumination by 405 nm light were from the authors' previous study (Kiran et al), which employed the same wavelength and optical filter combination, to assess differences between materials. The levels of fluorescence for each sample was analyzed by using histogram data for luminosity from the Adobe Photoshop software.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary fluorophores responsible for these emissions are organic components of the dental hard tissues . Different brands of RBC vary considerably in their fluorescence properties, according to the fluorophores (such as rare earth oxides) that have been added to the material during its manufacture, because the resin matrix itself and the filler particles are not normally fluorescent …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When violet light (405 nm) is used and teeth are viewed under a long pass filter, natural tooth structure has blue‐green fluorescence. Depending on the brand used, an RBC restoration may show stronger or weaker emissions of the same color, or emissions of different colours . While tooth structure and restorations may match under white light, they differ in appearance when viewed under specific wavelengths of light .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Fluorescence‐aided selective removal of resin‐based composite restorative materials: An in vitro comparative study

Kiran

Chapman

Tennant

et al. 2019

J Esthet Restor Dent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: During removal of resin-based composite (RBC) restorations, removal of adjacent sound tooth structure can easily occur. The aim of the study was to compare the fluorescence-aided identification of restorations (FAIR) method with the conventional method (CM) using white light illumination for the selective removal of toothcolored RBC restorations. Materials and Methods:Sixty extracted teeth were used to prepare 15 sets of models, each with four teeth. Cavities were prepared in each tooth and a digital three-dimensional scan of each model was taken in STL format. The teeth were then restored with either Admira Fusion, GRADIA DIRECT X, or TPH Spectra LV (20 teeth for each). Five dentists removed the restorations from sets of 12 teeth (six each using FAIR, and six using CM). From a postoperative scan, changes in intercuspal cavity width were measured using the 3D tool CAD software.Results: Using FAIR, changes in cavity width were not significant (P = .17), and there was no significant interoperator variance (P = .3). In contrast, when using CM, there was a significant increase in cavity width (P = .0025), and considerable interoperator variance (P = .03). FAIR allowed faster completion of the task of restoration removal (average time 100.23 seconds, vs 165.13 seconds from CM). Conclusion:The FAIR method facilitates the selective removal of tooth-colored RBC restorations, with reduced time and less inadvertent removal of sound tooth structure.Clinical Significance: By enhancing the differentiation between the restorative material and adjacent tooth structure, the FAIR method facilitates removal of toothcolored restorations, while concurrently prevents unnecessary removal of healthy tooth structure. The same approach may have applications for removal of resin-based materials such as resin cements under restorations, resin fissure sealants, and orthodontic brackets bonding resins. K E Y W O R D S dental composite, fluorescence, lasers, removal, restoration replacement

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fluorescence‐aided selective removal of resin‐based composite restorative materials: An in vitro comparative study

Kiran

Chapman

Tennant

et al. 2019

J Esthet Restor Dent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have determined that this wavelength has been able to detect composite restorations. 7,11 However, composite resins of varying brands and shades fluoresce at different brightnesses and intensities. 3 Enamel has inherent fluorescence when exposed to ultraviolet light and the detection of resins is based on their fluorescence differing from enamel, regardless of whether the restorations fluoresce more or less, or brighter or dimmer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of a Fluorescent Light Source as an Adjunct to Traditional Methods to Detect Composite Resin Dental Restorations

Kolbinson¹,

Reynaud²,

Doig³

et al. 2018

International Journal of Experimental Dental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:To determine if there is a difference in detecting composite restorations by using traditional methods as compared to using an ultraviolet light source and if it would be reasonable to augment the traditional method with the use of an alternate light source. Materials and methods:Twenty-two participants were examined independently by one dentist with traditional visual and tactile dental examination methods (using an overhead light, a dental mirror, and a dental explorer) while simultaneously viewing a pantomograph of the patients and by another dentist utilizing an ultraviolet light source, an overhead light, and an intraoral mirror. The number and position of detected composite restorations for each method was calculated and compared. Comparisons between the two methods were performed using two-sample t-tests. All statistical tests were two-tailed with a significance level of 0.05. Results:Differences in the number of surfaces restored with composite restorations [11.0 (SD = ±6.2) and 9.6 (SD = ±6.4) for the manual and light exams respectively] and the number of composite restorations [8.1 (SD = ±3.5) and 7.1 (SD = ±3.8) for the manual and light exams respectively] between the manual and light examination methods were not statistically significant (p values = 0.45 and 0.39). Results from the study suggest that the level of agreement between the two examination methods was 81.1%, but that neither method is without the potential for inaccuracy regarding composite restoration detection. Conclusion and clinical significance:The study indicates that the use of an ultraviolet light source can be an adjunctive clinical tool for the practicing clinical dentist to add to the traditional visual, tactile, and radiographic examination methods, increasing the accuracy and reliability of diagnostic examinations.

show abstract

Accuracy of the fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) for detecting tooth-colored restorations utilizing different fluorescence-inducing devices: an ex vivo comparative study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The aim of the present study was to compare the accuracy of the conventional illumination method (CONV) and the fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) for distinguishing between composite restorations and intact teeth using different fluorescence-inducing devices commonly used for FIT. Materials and methods Six groups of six dentists equipped with one of six different FIT systems each independently attempted to identify composite restorations and intact teeth on a full-mouth model with 22 composite restorations using CONV and, 1 h later, FIT. The entire procedure was repeated 1 week later. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values, including 95% confidence intervals (CI), were calculated for CONV and FIT overall and for each device. The influence of examiner age, method, and device on each parameter was assessed by multivariate analysis of variance. Results The sensitivity (84%, CI 81–86%), specificity (94%, CI 93–96%), PPV (92%, CI 90–94%), and NPV (90%, CI 88–91%) of FIT was significantly higher than that of CONV (47%, CI 44–50%; 82%, CI 79–84%; 66%, CI 62–69%, and 69%, CI 68–71%, respectively; p<0.001). The differences between CONV and FIT were significant for all parameters and FIT systems except VistaCam, which achieved no significant difference in specificity. Examiners younger than 40 years attained significantly higher sensitivity and negative predictive values than older examiners. Conclusions FIT is more reliable for detecting composite restorations than the conventional illumination method. Clinical relevance FIT can be considered an additional or alternative tool for improving the detection of composite restorations.

show abstract

Forensic applications: Fluorescence properties of tooth-coloured restorative materials using a fluorescence DSLR camera

Cited by 18 publications

References 14 publications

Fluorescence‐aided selective removal of resin‐based composite restorative materials: An in vitro comparative study

Fluorescence‐aided selective removal of resin‐based composite restorative materials: An in vitro comparative study

Use of a Fluorescent Light Source as an Adjunct to Traditional Methods to Detect Composite Resin Dental Restorations

Accuracy of the fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) for detecting tooth-colored restorations utilizing different fluorescence-inducing devices: an ex vivo comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About