Department of Operative Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece University of Athens (EKPA), Greece.
Department of Operative Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece University of Athens (EKPA), Greece.
Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2021 Jun;34:102252. doi: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2021.102252. Epub 2021 Mar 9.
This study aimed to validate the in vivo performance of Diagnodent and Vista proof devices with ICDAS clinical criteria on incipient carious lesions in adults.
A total of 44 adult patients with 230 incipient occlusal caries took part in the present study. These patients were assessed for caries with ICDAS clinical criteria, and then they were examined with Diagnodent pen™ (DP) and Vista proof™ (VP) fluorescence devices. Sensitivity, specificity accuracy, and ICC agreement between devices with ICDAS criteria, which served as a gold standard, were evaluated.
Regarding the caries diagnostic devices, sensitivity and specificity found 0,61 and 0,51 for DP, and 0,64 and 0,54 for VP, respectively. The different detection methods showed no differences in diagnostic capacity (Az values) each other, and ICC values with ICDAS criteria were calculated low.
DP and VP do not contribute to incipient occlusal carious lesions' better detective ability compared with visual ICDAS clinical criteria. The DP and VP devices presented no differences in diagnostic ability and measured lesion depth concerning the visual examination.
本研究旨在用 ICDAS 临床标准验证 Diagnodent 和 Vista proof 设备在成人早期龋损中的体内性能。
本研究共纳入 44 名患有 230 颗早期窝沟龋的成年患者。这些患者使用 ICDAS 临床标准评估龋损，然后使用 Diagnodent 笔（DP）和 Vista proof（VP）荧光设备进行检查。评估了以 ICDAS 标准为金标准的设备与 DP 和 VP 之间的灵敏度、特异性、准确性和 ICC 一致性。
对于龋齿诊断设备，DP 的灵敏度和特异性分别为 0.61 和 0.51，VP 的灵敏度和特异性分别为 0.64 和 0.54。不同的检测方法在诊断能力（Az 值）上没有差异，与 ICDAS 标准计算的 ICC 值较低。
与视觉 ICDAS 临床标准相比，DP 和 VP 并不能提高对早期窝沟龋损的检测能力。与视觉检查相比，DP 和 VP 设备在诊断能力和测量病变深度方面没有差异。
