Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy.
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 70-204 Szczecin, Poland.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Apr 24;17(8):2937. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17082937.
Early diagnosis of occlusal caries is of paramount importance for a minimally invasive approach in dentistry. The aim of the present in vivo clinical prospective study was to compare the diagnostic outcomes of visual subjective evaluation between the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS-II) and an intraoral fluorescence-based camera (VistaCam iX Proof, Dürr Dental, Bietigheim-Bissingen, Germany) for the detection of pits and fissures in early caries lesions of posterior teeth.
The study included 1011 posterior teeth in 255 patients aged 13-20 years (mean age 16 ± 2.2 years). Two blinded operators evaluated all the occlusal surfaces and the first assigned an ICDAS-II code, while the second assessed the VistaCam score: sound enamel (score 0-1.2); initial enamel decay (score 1.2-1.5); dentine caries (score 1.5-3).
Some 283 (28%) of the assessed teeth were ICDAS-II code 0; 334 (33%) code 1; 189 (18.7%) code 2; 176 (17.4%) code 3; and 29 (2.9%) code 4. The level of agreement between the two procedures was expressed by using Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa statistics and performing McNemar's test. VistaCam assessed in 513 (50.7%) sound enamel; in 292 (28.9%) initial enamel decay; and in 206 (20.4%) dentine caries.
This comparative study showed a poor agreement between the two diagnostic methods, especially between ICDAS-II 0, 1 and 2 codes and fluorescence assessments.
早期诊断龋病对于口腔医学的微创方法至关重要。本前瞻性临床研究旨在比较国际龋病检测与评估系统(ICDAS-II)和基于口腔内荧光的相机(VistaCam iX Proof,Dürr Dental,比蒂格海姆-比辛根,德国)对后牙早期龋病窝沟的视觉主观评估的诊断结果。
本研究纳入了 255 名年龄在 13-20 岁(平均年龄 16 ± 2.2 岁)的患者的 1011 颗后牙。两名盲法操作者评估了所有的咬合面,第一位操作者记录 ICDAS-II 编码,第二位操作者评估 VistaCam 评分:正常釉质(评分 0-1.2);早期釉质脱矿(评分 1.2-1.5);牙本质龋(评分 1.5-3)。
283 颗(28%)评估的牙齿 ICDAS-II 编码为 0;334 颗(33%)编码为 1;189 颗(18.7%)编码为 2;176 颗(17.4%)编码为 3;29 颗(2.9%)编码为 4。采用 Cohen's 和 Fleiss' kappa 统计量和 McNemar 检验评估两种方法的一致性。VistaCam 评估结果为 513 颗(50.7%)正常釉质;292 颗(28.9%)早期釉质脱矿;206 颗(20.4%)牙本质龋。
本对比研究显示两种诊断方法之间的一致性较差,尤其是 ICDAS-II 0、1 和 2 编码与荧光评估之间。