Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Nov;23(11):3933-3940. doi: 10.1007/s00784-019-02824-0. Epub 2019 Jan 28.
The aim of the present in vitro study was to determine the ability of Diagnocam to detect caries at an early stage and to compare it with digital radiography.
One hundred twenty proximal surfaces composed equally of sound and decayed surfaces were evaluated by assessing images captured with Diagnocam (Kavo, Biberach, Germany) and digital radiography (DR). All images were assessed twice by two calibrated dentists with a minimum interval of 2 weeks between examinations. The results were compared with μCT scans.
Inter-rater reliability showed nearly perfect agreement; a high intra-rater reliability was calculated. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients showed a strong correlation of Diagnocam and μCT (0.82). DR and μCT achieved a slightly lower correlation (0.73). The surfaces were categorized into sound surfaces, enamel lesions, and dentin lesions to determine intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), sensitivity and specificity. ICCs between μCT and DR ranged from 0.20 to 0.63. ICCs between Diagnocam and DR were higher in all categories and ranged from 0.56 to 0.83. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of Diagnocam achieved mostly higher values than DR. In detecting enamel lesions, sensitivity was 0.36 for DR and 0.59 for the DC. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of Diagnocam were larger than those of DR in all categories.
Diagnocam is more capable of detecting initial proximal lesions than DR and also has a higher sensitivity for dentin lesions. However, caries progression in dentin cannot be reliably determined with Diagnocam.
Diagnocam may be suitable as a supplement to X-ray diagnostics in clinical use.
本体外研究的目的是确定 Diagnocam 早期检测龋齿的能力，并将其与数字射线照相术进行比较。
将 120 个近端表面，等量分为健康表面和龋齿表面，通过评估 Kavo（德国比伯拉赫）Diagnocam 和数字射线照相术（DR）捕获的图像进行评估。由两名经过校准的牙医对所有图像进行两次评估，两次评估之间的间隔至少为 2 周。将结果与 μCT 扫描进行比较。
观察者间可靠性显示出近乎完美的一致性；计算出高的观察者内可靠性。Spearman 等级相关系数显示 Diagnocam 和 μCT 之间具有很强的相关性（0.82）。DR 和 μCT 相关性略低（0.73）。将表面分类为健康表面、釉质病变和牙本质病变，以确定组内相关系数（ICC）、敏感性和特异性。μCT 和 DR 之间的 ICC 范围为 0.20 至 0.63。Diagnocam 和 DR 之间的 ICC 在所有类别中均较高，范围为 0.56 至 0.83。Diagnocam 的敏感性、特异性和准确性大多高于 DR。在检测釉质病变时，DR 的敏感性为 0.36，而 DC 的敏感性为 0.59。在所有类别中，Diagnocam 的接收者操作特征（ROC）曲线下面积均大于 DR。
Diagnocam 比 DR 更能检测初始近侧病变，并且对牙本质病变也具有更高的敏感性。然而，牙本质中的龋齿进展无法通过 Diagnocam 可靠地确定。
Diagnocam 可能适合作为临床 X 射线诊断的补充。
