CROC EA 4847, Université Clermont Auvergne, F-63100, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Service d'Odontologie, CHU Estaing Clermont-Ferrand, F-63003 cedex 1, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Apr;23(4):1513-1524. doi: 10.1007/s00784-019-02839-7. Epub 2019 Feb 21.
The objective of the manuscript is to systematically review the different techniques developed for activity assessment of coronal carious lesions (AACCL) in clinical settings.
A search of PubMed identified original articles in English reporting on the different concepts/tools for AACCL in clinical settings and, when available, data related to their in vivo/in situ validation in terms of sensitivity, specificity, inter- and intra-examiner reproducibilities, area under the receiving operating curve, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and relative risk of lesion progression.
The present review included 25 articles. Four groups of techniques are available (1) systems based on combinations of visual and tactile criteria; devices based on (2) pH assessment, (3) fluorescence, or (4) bioluminescence. The most studied systems are those based on combinations of visual and tactile parameters when bioluminescence suffers from the lack of in vivo evaluation. Validation studies showed a wide disparity among protocols in terms of populations, dentitions, teeth surfaces, study design, the gold standard, and validation criteria.
There is a need for definition and harmonization of standards for activity assessment-related concepts/tools, as well as further investigations for in vivo validation of newly developed tools.
Carious lesion activity is an important component to be taken into account when making decisions as to appropriate clinical caries management. The development and use of validated techniques which are easy to use in everyday dental practice are important.
本文旨在系统地回顾用于临床评估冠部龋损活动性(AACCL)的不同技术。
通过检索 PubMed 数据库,筛选出了报道了临床环境中 AACCL 不同概念/工具的英文原始文章,并且在有条件的情况下,纳入了其在体内/原位验证方面的敏感性、特异性、观察者间和观察者内可重复性、接受者操作曲线下面积、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和病变进展相对风险的数据。
本综述共纳入 25 篇文章。目前有 4 组技术(1)基于视觉和触觉标准组合的系统;基于(2)pH 值评估、(3)荧光或(4)生物发光的设备。研究最多的系统是基于视觉和触觉参数组合的系统,而生物发光由于缺乏体内评估,因此受到限制。验证研究表明,不同方案在人群、牙列、牙齿表面、研究设计、金标准和验证标准方面存在广泛差异。
需要定义和协调与活动性评估相关的概念/工具的标准,并进一步研究新开发工具的体内验证。
在制定适当的临床龋齿管理决策时,龋齿病变的活动性是一个重要的考虑因素。开发和使用易于在日常牙科实践中使用的经过验证的技术非常重要。