Iranzo-Cortés José Enrique, Almarche-Tarazona María, Montiel-Company José María, Almerich-Silla José Manuel
Stomatology Department, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Lasers Surg Med. 2018 Feb;50(2):166-173. doi: 10.1002/lsm.22751. Epub 2017 Nov 2.
In view of the present fall in advanced cavitation lesion prevalence, diagnostic methods have been developed to assist in assessing and measuring pre-cavitation lesions. The purpose of this study was to assess the VistaProof fluorescence-based system in vitro and compare the results with those of visual examination using the ICDAS II criteria.
100 permanent teeth were collected and 65 were chosen at random for this study. Two separate examiners each examined them twice, 3 weeks apart, assessing them in accordance with ICDAS II. They were subsequently examined with the VistaProof system and the images were stored in the computer program. After obtaining all these data, the teeth were prepared for histological examination and the extent of the lesion was measured.
The sensitivity with VistaProof was 0.705 for examiner 1 and 0.818 for examiner 2. With ICDAS II it was 0.796 and 0.864, respectively. The specificity was 0.810 and 0.619, respectively, for VistaProof and 0.810 and 0.952 for ICDAS II. The agreement with the histology results was 0.757 and 0.719, respectively, for VistaProof and 0.802 and 0.908 for ICDAS II. The intra-examiner and inter-examiner reproducibility of both methods was also assessed. For VistaProof the values were 0.76 and 0.78 intra-examiner agreement and 0.65 inter-examiner. For ICDAS II they were 0.82 and 0.91 intra-examiner and 0.76 inter-examiner. The data showed that both ICDAS II and VistaProof presented very good sensitivity but moderate specificity, as well as strong agreement (fair to good) with the histology results, and the intra-examiner and inter-examiner reproducibility was significant for both methods.
ICDAS II criteria and the assistance provided by VistaProof increase the ability to diagnose incipient lesions and take early action to treat them. It is important to combine the two in order to obtain more significant results, considering non-opperative treatments for non-cavitated lesions diagnosed. Lasers Surg. Med. 50:166-173, 2018. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
鉴于目前晚期空洞性病变患病率的下降,已开发出诊断方法来协助评估和测量空洞前病变。本研究的目的是在体外评估基于VistaProof荧光的系统,并将结果与使用ICDAS II标准的视觉检查结果进行比较。
收集100颗恒牙,随机选取65颗用于本研究。两名独立的检查者分别对它们进行两次检查,间隔3周,按照ICDAS II进行评估。随后用VistaProof系统对它们进行检查,并将图像存储在计算机程序中。获得所有这些数据后,对牙齿进行组织学检查并测量病变范围。
检查者1使用VistaProof的敏感性为0.705,检查者2为0.818。使用ICDAS II时,分别为0.796和0.864。VistaProof的特异性分别为0.810和0.619,ICDAS II的特异性分别为0.810和0.952。VistaProof与组织学结果的一致性分别为0.757和0.719,ICDAS II与组织学结果的一致性分别为0.802和0.908。还评估了两种方法在检查者内部和检查者之间的可重复性。对于VistaProof,检查者内部一致性值为0.76,检查者之间为0.78,检查者之间为0.65。对于ICDAS II,检查者内部为0.82和0.91,检查者之间为0.76。数据表明,ICDAS II和VistaProof均具有很高的敏感性,但特异性中等,与组织学结果的一致性较强(一般到良好),并且两种方法在检查者内部和检查者之间的可重复性都很显著。
ICDAS II标准和VistaProof提供的辅助提高了诊断早期病变并采取早期治疗措施的能力。考虑到对已诊断的非空洞性病变进行非手术治疗,将两者结合以获得更显著的结果很重要。激光外科与医学。50:166 - 173, 2018。©2017威利期刊公司。