Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, München, Germany.
Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Sep;22(7):2431-2438. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2512-0. Epub 2018 Jun 18.
This study compared the diagnostic outcomes of visual inspection (VI), digital bitewing radiography (BWR), and near-infrared light transillumination (NIR-LT, DIAGNOcam, KaVo, Biberach, Germany) for occlusal caries detection and assessment of posterior teeth.
This study included 203 patients (mean age 23.0 years). All individuals received a meticulous VI. Additionally, BWR and NIR-LT images were collected. All BWR and NIR-LT images were blindly evaluated for the presence of enamel caries lesions (ECLs) and dentin caries lesions (DCLs). The descriptive statistical analyses included calculation of frequencies, cross tabulations, and pairwise comparisons using Pearson chi-square tests.
The majority of ECLs/DCLs were detected by VI in this low-risk adult population. The additional diagnostic outcomes in terms of ECLs/DCLs amounted to 5.0% (BWR) and 6.8% (NIR-LT). The combined usage of VI/NIR-LT or VI/BWR identified 95.7 and 94.4% of all ECLs/DCLs on occlusal surfaces, respectively.
This comparative diagnostic study showed that VI detected the majority of occlusal caries lesions. Both additional methods showed limited benefits. Due to the valuable features of NIR-LT, i.e., X-ray freeness and clinical practicability, this method might be preferred over X-ray-based methods. Nevertheless, BWRs should be prescribed in clinical situations where insufficient fillings or multiple (deep) caries lesions are diagnosed or where there is a need to assess the caries extension in relation to the pulp.
VI has to be understood as caries detection method of choice on occlusal surfaces in low-risk adult population which may help to avoid multiple diagnostic testing, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment.
本研究比较了目视检查(VI)、数字咬合片射线照相(BWR)和近红外光透射(NIR-LT,DIAGNOcam,KaVo,Biberach,德国)在检测和评估后牙咬合面龋病方面的诊断结果。
本研究纳入了 203 名患者(平均年龄 23.0 岁)。所有患者均接受了细致的 VI 检查。此外,还采集了 BWR 和 NIR-LT 图像。所有 BWR 和 NIR-LT 图像均进行盲法评估,以检测有无釉质龋病损(ECLs)和牙本质龋病损(DCLs)。描述性统计分析包括计算频率、交叉制表和使用 Pearson 卡方检验进行两两比较。
在这个低危成人人群中,VI 主要检测到 ECLs/DCLs。在 ECLs/DCLs 方面,BWR 和 NIR-LT 的额外诊断结果分别为 5.0%和 6.8%。VI/NIR-LT 或 VI/BWR 的联合使用分别在磨牙面识别出了 95.7%和 94.4%的所有 ECLs/DCLs。
本对比诊断研究表明,VI 检测到了大多数的磨牙面龋病损。两种额外的方法均显示出有限的优势。由于 NIR-LT 具有无射线和临床实用性等有价值的特点,该方法可能优于基于射线的方法。然而,在需要评估与牙髓相关的龋病扩展、填充物不足或存在多个(深)龋病损或需要进行治疗的情况下,应开具 BWR 检查。
VI 应被视为低危成人人群磨牙面龋病的首选检测方法,这有助于避免多次诊断性检查、过度诊断和过度治疗。