Browsing by Subject "caries detection"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    In vitro Detection of Occlusal Caries on Permanent Teeth by a Visual, Light-Induced Fluorescence and Photothermal Radiometry and Modulated Luminescence Methods
    (Karger, 2015-10) Jallad, Mahmoud; Zero, Domenick; Eckert, George; Ferreira Zandona, Ag; Department of Cariology, Operative Dentistry, and Dental Public Health, IU School of Dentistry
    Background: The paradigm shift towards the nonsurgical management of dental caries relies on the early detection of the disease. Detection of caries at an early stage is of unequivocal importance for early preventive intervention. Objective: The aim of this in vitro study is to evaluate the performance of a visual examination using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) criteria, two quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) systems - Inspektor™ Pro and QLF-D Biluminator™ 2 (Inspektor Research Systems B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands) - and a photothermal radiometry and modulated luminescence, The Canary System® (Quantum Dental Technologies, Toronto, Ont., Canada) on the detection of primary occlusal caries on permanent teeth. Methods: A total of 60 teeth with occlusal surface sites ranging from sound to noncavitated lesions (ICDAS 0-4) were assessed with each detection method twice in a random order. Histological validation was used to compare methods for sensitivity, specificity, percent correct, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), at standard and optimum sound thresholds. Interexaminer agreement and intraexaminer repeatability were measured using intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: Interexaminer agreement ranged between 0.48 (The Canary System®) and 0.96 (QLF-D Biluminator™ 2). Intraexaminer repeatability ranges were 0.33-0.63 (The Canary System®) and 0.96-0.99 (QLF-D Biluminator™ 2). The sensitivity range was 0.75-0.96 while that of specificity was 0.43-0.89. The AUC were 0.79 (The Canary System®), 0.87 (ICDAS), 0.90 (Inspektor™ Pro), and 0.94 (QLF-D Biluminator™ 2). Conclusion: ICDAS had the best combination of sensitivity and specificity followed by QLF-D Biluminator™ 2 at optimum threshold.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    In Vitro Performance of Near Infrared Light Transillumination at 780-nm and Digital Radiography for Detection of Non-Cavitated Approximal Caries
    (Elsevier, 2017) Abogazalah, Naif; Eckert, George J.; Ando, Masatoshi; Department of Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public Health, School of Dentistry
    Objectives To evaluate the ability of a Near Infrared Light Transillumination (NILT) device to detect non-cavitated approximal caries lesions; and to compare its performance to Digital Radiography (DR). Methods Thirty human extracted premolars (sound to lesions into the outer one-third of dentin) were selected. Lesion depth was confirmed by micro-computed tomography (μ-CT). Teeth were mounted in a custom-made device to simulate approximal contact. DR and NILT (CariVu™, DEXIS, LLC, Hatfield, PA, USA) examinations were performed and repeated by three trained and calibrated examiners. Sensitivity, specificity, area under ROC curve (Az), inter- and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) for each method, and correlation among the methods were determined. Results ICCs for intra-/inter-examiner agreement were substantial for NILT (0.69/0.64), and moderate for DR (0.52/0.48). Sensitivity/specificity for NILT and DR were 0.68/0.93 and 0.50/0.64, respectively. Az for NILT was 0.81, while for DR it was 0.61. Spearman correlation coefficient with μ-CT for NILT (0.65, p<0.001) demonstrated moderate association, while that of DR suggested no association (0.19, p = 0.289). Conclusion Within the limitations of this in vitro study, NILT demonstrated a potential for early approximal caries detection. NILT and DR performed the same regarding the accuracy for non-cavitated approximal caries detection; however, NILT was superior to DR in terms of repeatability, agreement and correlation with μ-CT.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    In vitro visual and visible light transillumination methods for detection of natural non-cavitated approximal caries
    (Springer, 2018-03) Abogazalah, N.; Eckert, G. J.; Ando, M.; Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public Health, School of Dentistry
    Objectives The objective was to evaluate a visible-light-transillumination (using Digital Imaging Fiber-Optic Transillumination machine: DIFOTI) method using occlusal view (DIFOTI-occl), axial view (buccal and lingual: DIFOTI-axial), and combination of all views (DIFOTI-all) for detecting non-cavitated approximal caries and to compare its performance to visual examination (International Caries Detection and Assessment System: ICDAS). Materials and methods Thirty extracted human premolars were selected (sound to lesions into the outer one-third of the dentine) based on micro-computed tomography (μ-CT). Teeth were mounted in a custom-made device to simulate approximal contact. DIFOTI (Electro-Optical Sciences Inc., Irvington, NY, USA) images were obtained from the occlusal, buccal, and lingual views. DIFOTI image and ICDAS examinations were performed and repeated by three trained/calibrated examiners. Sensitivity, specificity, area under receiver operating characteristics curve (Az), inter- and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), and correlation were determined. Results Sensitivity/specificity was for DIFOTI-occl: 0.42/0.75, DIFOTI-axial: 0.86/0.93, DIFOTI-all: 0.91/0.69, and for ICDAS: 0.89/0.83. Az for DIFOTI-occl was significantly lower than that of DIFOTI-axial (p < 0.001), DIFOTI-all (p = 0.002), and ICDAS (p = 0.005). Spearman correlation coefficients with μ-CT for DIFOTI-occl (r = 0.39) showed weak association, while DIFOTI-axial (r = 0.80), DIFOTI-all (r = 0.91), and ICDAS (r = 0.90) showed moderate association. ICCs for intra-examiner repeatability/inter-examiner agreement were for DIFOTI-occl (0.64/0.58), DIFOTI-axial (0.92/0.89), DIFOTI-all (0.85/0.83), and ICDAS (0.79/0.72). Conclusions The results of the current in vitro study suggest that, for detection of non-cavitated approximal caries lesions, DIFOTI performs better using axial than occlusal view.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Performance of the caries diagnosis feature of intraoral scanners and near-infrared imaging technology—A narrative review
    (Wiley, 2023-12) Lin, Wei-Shao; Alfaraj, Amal; Lippert, Frank; Yang, Chao-Chieh; Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry
    Purpose To describe and discuss the benefits and drawbacks of various dental caries diagnostic techniques, including the use of intraoral scanners for caries diagnosis based on near-infrared imaging (NIR) technology. Material and Methods A MEDLINE search from 1980–2023 focused on dental caries diagnostic techniques, emphasizing intraoral scanners using NIR technology. Alternative caries detection methods were also evaluated for their advantages and limitations, enabling a comparison with NIR. The review included traditional caries tools, the latest detection methods, and NIR's role in intraoral scanners, drawing from case reports and both in vivo and in vitro studies. Keywords like “caries detection,” “intraoral scanners,” and “Near Infrared Imaging (NIRI)” guided the search. After screening titles and abstracts for relevance, full texts with valuable insights were thoroughly analyzed. The data was grouped into three: traditional diagnostics, advanced digital methods, and intraoral scanner-based detection. Results This comprehensive narrative review described and discussed the current state of dental caries diagnostic methods, given the insufficient number of clinical investigations suitable for a systematic review. Traditional caries diagnosis techniques have shown variable accuracy dependent on a dentist's experience and the potential over-removal of healthy tooth structures. Intraoral scanners have emerged as a novel caries detection method, because of their integration of NIR technology. Various studies have confirmed the efficacy of NIR in detecting interproximal caries and in the early diagnosis of non-cavitated caries. Specifically, intraoral scanners have demonstrated promising results, proving comparable to established diagnostic methods like bitewing radiography. Nevertheless, while the integration of NIR into intraoral scanners seems promising, the technology still faces challenges, notably its accuracy in detecting secondary and subgingival cavities. However, with anticipated integrations of AI, NIR in intraoral scanners could revolutionize early caries detection. Conclusions Intraoral scanners with NIR technology offer non-destructive imaging, real-time lesion visuals, and enhanced patient communication. Although comparable to bitewing radiography in some studies, a universally accepted diagnostic tool is lacking. Future research should compare them with existing methods, focusing on clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and patient acceptance.