Bozdemir Esin, Karaarslan Emine Sirin, Ozsevik A Semih, Ata Cebe M, Aktan Ali Murat
Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey.
Photomed Laser Surg. 2013 Jul;31(7):322-7. doi: 10.1089/pho.2012.3458. Epub 2013 Jun 13.
The aim of this in vivo study was to compare the performance of light-emitting diode (LED)- and laser fluorescence (LF)-based devices with that of visual inspection (VI) in the diagnosis of occlusal caries.
A total of 156 occlusal surfaces were investigated. Each occlusal surface was assessed with LED- and LF-based devices after a VI was performed. Pit and fissure opening was applied to the occlusal surfaces in which opacity or discoloration was distinctly visible after airdrying. The inter-examiner reliability of caries examination was assessed using the weighted κ statistics. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of occlusal caries diagnosis using these methods were calculated according to the appropriate thresholds.
Acceptable inter-examiner agreement was found for the LED- and LF-based devices and VI (κ=0.61, κ=0.76, and κ=0.87, respectively). Higher specificity values were achieved at a T2 threshold for the LF-based device (0.76 and 0.80) and at a T1 threshold for the LED-based readings (0.60 and 0.62) and VI (0.90 and 0.93) for both observers. With regard to VI, higher sensitivity values were found at both thresholds for the two observers in comparing the three caries detection methods (0.98 at T1 and 0.96 at T2). The accuracy values for T1 were higher than those for the T2 values, for all three caries detection methods.
Caries lesions may be detected more accurately than clinically sound areas by both caries detection devices.
本体内研究旨在比较基于发光二极管(LED)和激光荧光(LF)的设备与目视检查(VI)在咬合面龋诊断中的性能。
共研究了156个咬合面。在进行目视检查后,使用基于LED和LF的设备对每个咬合面进行评估。对吹干后明显可见不透明或变色的咬合面进行窝沟开口处理。使用加权κ统计量评估龋病检查的检查者间可靠性。根据适当的阈值计算使用这些方法进行咬合面龋诊断的敏感性、特异性和准确性。
基于LED和LF的设备以及目视检查的检查者间一致性可接受(κ分别为0.61、0.76和0.87)。对于基于LF的设备,在T2阈值时特异性值较高(0.76和0.80);对于基于LED的读数和目视检查,在T1阈值时特异性值较高(0.60和0.62以及0.90和0.93),两位观察者的情况均如此。关于目视检查,在比较三种龋病检测方法时,两位观察者在两个阈值下均发现较高的敏感性值(T1时为0.98,T2时为0.96)。对于所有三种龋病检测方法,T1的准确性值均高于T2的准确性值。
两种龋病检测设备检测龋损的准确性可能高于临床健康区域。