Charvat Jindrich, Prochazka Ales, Kucera Tomas, Tichy Antonin, Yurchenko Maksim, Himmlova Lucie
Institute of Dental Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine of the Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, 121 08 Prague, Czech Republic.
Department of Computing and Control Engineering, University of Chemistry and Technology in Prague, 166 28 Prague, Czech Republic.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 May 27;13(11):1878. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13111878.
This in vitro study aimed to compare outcomes of dental caries detection using visual inspection classified according to the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) with objective assessments using a well-established laser fluorescence system (Diagnodent pen) and a novel diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS) device. One hundred extracted permanent premolars and molars were utilized, including sound teeth, teeth with non-cavitated caries, or teeth with small cavitated lesions. A total of 300 regions of interest (ROIs) were assessed using each detection method. Visual inspection, being a subjective method, was performed by two independent examiners. The presence and extent of caries were histologically verified according to Downer's criteria, serving as a reference for other detection methods. Histological results revealed 180 sound ROIs and 120 carious ROIs, categorized into three different extents of caries. Overall, there was no significant difference between the detection methods in sensitivity (0.90-0.93) and false negative rate (0.05-0.07). However, DRS exhibited superior performance in specificity (0.98), accuracy (0.95), and false positive rate (0.04) compared to other detection methods. Although the tested DRS prototype device exhibited limited penetration depth, it shows promise as a method, particularly for the detection of incipient caries.
这项体外研究旨在比较根据国际龋病检测与评估系统(ICDAS)进行的目视检查龋齿检测结果与使用成熟的激光荧光系统(Diagnodent笔)和新型漫反射光谱(DRS)设备进行的客观评估结果。研究使用了100颗拔除的恒牙前磨牙和磨牙,包括健康牙齿、非龋洞性龋齿牙齿或有小龋洞病变的牙齿。每种检测方法共评估了300个感兴趣区域(ROI)。目视检查作为一种主观方法,由两名独立的检查人员进行。根据唐纳标准对龋齿的存在和范围进行组织学验证,作为其他检测方法的参考。组织学结果显示有180个健康ROI和120个龋损ROI,分为三种不同程度的龋齿。总体而言,各检测方法在敏感性(0.90 - 0.93)和假阴性率(0.05 - 0.07)方面无显著差异。然而,与其他检测方法相比,DRS在特异性(0.98)、准确性(0.95)和假阳性率(0.04)方面表现更优。尽管测试的DRS原型设备的穿透深度有限,但它显示出作为一种方法的潜力,特别是对于早期龋齿的检测。
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023-5-27
Lasers Med Sci. 2012-5-11
Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2020-2
Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2020-6-30
Int J Paediatr Dent. 2019-3-6