Validity of Diagnostic and Treatment Decisions of Fissure Caries

Lussi, Adrian

doi:10.1159/000261380

Cited by 172 publications

(111 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although there are known drawbacks, visual inspection (VI) alone has been claimed to be the best diagnostic method in populations with low caries prevalence, but it is unable to correctly detect caries lesions because of its low sensitivity 12 . On the other hand, the use of a sharp probe along with the visual method does not appear to improve the diagnostic accuracy 16,21 . It may contaminate other sound sites 14 , damage the fissure 3 as well as facilitate the lesion's progression 29 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Occlusal caries diagnosis in permanent teeth: an in vitro study

Angnes¹,

Angnes²,

Grande

et al. 2005

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The reduction in caries prevalence has not occurred uniformly for all dental surfaces. As the occlusal surfaces are still the most likely sites for the development of lesions, new methods of diagnosis are still being evaluated. This study compared a laser fluorescence (LF) system (DIAGNOdent) with the Ekstrand's visual system for in vitro detection of occlusal caries. A total of 57 extracted molars with macroscopically intact occlusal surfaces were selected. Two-examiners assessed 110 sites by visual inspection (VI) and LF. After ten days from the first measurement, all teeth were re-evaluated through the same methods by each examiner. Caries extension was histologically assessed (X 40). The methods were compared by means of sensitivity, specificity, intra-and inter-examiner reproducibility and area under the ROC curve. The kappa's test showed good intra-and inter-examiner reproducibility for both methods. VI and LF showed similar sensitivities for both examiners, however, VI showed higher specificities than LF. The overall analysis, as demonstrated by the area under the ROC curve, showed that VI had a better performance than the LF device. It was concluded that the Ekstrand's visual system is more reliable than the LF device. LF should be considered only as an adjuvant for occlusal caries diagnosis. DESCRIPTORS: Lasers; Fluorescence; Dental caries; Molar; Diagnostic techniques and procedures. RESUMO:A redução da prevalência de cáries não ocorreu uniformemente para todas as superfícies dentárias. Como as superfícies oclusais ainda são as mais susceptíveis ao desenvolvimento de lesões, novos métodos de diagnóstico ainda estão sendo avaliados. Este estudo comparou um sistema de fluorescência a laser (DIAGNOdent -DD) com o método visual de Ekstrand na detecção de cárie oclusal. Um total de 57 terceiros molares com superfícies oclusais macroscopicamente intactas foram selecionados. Dois examinadores examinaram 110 sítios por inspecção visual (IV) e DD. Após dez dias da primeira mensuração, todos os dentes foram novamente avaliados pelos mesmos métodos. A extensão de cárie foi validada por exame histológico (40 X). Os dados foram analisados quanto a sensibilidade, especificidade, reprodutibilidade intra e interexaminador e área sob a curva ROC. O teste kappa demonstrou boa reprodutibilidade intra e interexaminadores para ambos os métodos. A IV e o DD apresentaram sensibilidade semelhante para ambos os examinadores, entretanto, a IV apresentou maior especificidade que o DD. A análise geral, através da área sob a curva ROC, mostrou que a IV teve um melhor desempenho que o DD. Concluiu-se que o critério visual proposto por Ekstrand é mais confiável para o diagnóstico de cáries oclusais. O DD deve ser considerado apenas como um coadjuvante no exame de cárie em superfícies oclusais.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Occlusal caries diagnosis in permanent teeth: an in vitro study

Angnes¹,

Angnes²,

Grande

et al. 2005

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Its impact on caries detection and treatment decision making has also been studied by various authors [8][9][10][11][12][13], as it is believed to allow for clearer visualisation of minute defects. However, some of these studies used high magnification values [10][11][12], others [9] have not correlated results with a gold standard [8]. To date there is no study reported which correlates the impact of magnification on visual-tactile detection of caries using ICDAS-II and a CPI-TN probe.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Low Level Magnification on Incipient Occlusal Caries Diagnosis and Treatment Decision Making

Sisodia

Manjunath

2014

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This in-vitro study aimed to test the accuracy and reproducibility in detection of incipient occlusal caries and treatment decision making using unenhanced visual-tactile technique and low level magnification by the use of loupes and surgical operating microscope (SOM).Methodology: Sixty extracted human posterior teeth were assessed by two examiners using ICDAS-II index and CPI-TN probe, with and without magnification. Histopathology was used as gold standard for diagnosis of caries and treatment decision making. Inter and intra examiner reproducibility was determined using Kappa statistics.

show abstract

“…2,3 The diagnosis of occlusal caries, especially the noncavitated type, is a difficult and problematic task because of the superficial remineralization potential that can delay cavitation and because of the extensive use of fluorides that can slow the progress of the lesion, strengthen occlusal enamel, and mask dentinal caries. 4,5 In the past decade, numerous studies have been published to improve existing dental caries detection techniques and to seek new noninvasive ones that could quantify the depth of carious lesions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative In Vitro Validation of VistaProof and DIAGNOdent Pen for Occlusal Caries Detection in Permanent Teeth

Seremidi¹,

Lagouvardos²,

Kavvadia³

2012

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laser/light fluorescence devices were highly reliable for occlusal caries diagnosis in permanent teeth but not superior in accuracy to visual methods. SUMMARYPurpose: Current caries diagnostic tools are neither very accurate nor very reliable for the detection of carious lesions of different depths. Thus, the development of new devices and techniques is needed. The aim of this in vitro study was to validate a newer fluorescence device, VistaProof (VP), and compare it with DIAGNOdent Pen (DP), direct visual (DV) and indirect visual methods (IDV), with respect to accuracy and reliability for the detection of occlusal caries in permanent teeth.Methods and Materials: One hundred seven sites on 41 occlusal surfaces of recently extracted premolars were selected and classified into lesion categories according to Ekstrand's clinical criteria, by direct and indirect visual examination. The fluorescence of the sites was also measured by the two devices, and the teeth were ground through the sites for histological evaluation of their lesion depth. One calibrated examiner of high reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC].0.85) made all of the evaluations. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of each detection method were estimated based on histological examination as the reference method, estimated using cutoff limits calculated on the basis of best agreement between the devices' values and histological examination. McNemar tests and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve , 2012, 37-3, 234-245 analyses were used to compare the validity measures of all detection methods at a=0.05, while the ICC was used to test the reproducibility of the methods based on a second measurement one week after the first.Results: There was no statistically significant difference (p.0.05) between the accuracy of DP and VPs for both enamel and dentin lesions. The areas under the ROC curves (AUC) for the two devices were also found not to be different (p.0.05). The reliability of DP was statistically significantly better than VP (p,0.05).Conclusion: The validity of both fluorescence devices were not found to be significantly different and not better than visual methods for the detection of noncavitated carious lesions.

show abstract

Validity of Diagnostic and Treatment Decisions of Fissure Caries

Cited by 172 publications

References 8 publications

Occlusal caries diagnosis in permanent teeth: an in vitro study

Occlusal caries diagnosis in permanent teeth: an in vitro study

Impact of Low Level Magnification on Incipient Occlusal Caries Diagnosis and Treatment Decision Making

Comparative In Vitro Validation of VistaProof and DIAGNOdent Pen for Occlusal Caries Detection in Permanent Teeth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About