Department of General Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Periodontal Research Group, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical & Dental Sciences, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; Birmingham Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
J Dent. 2023 Dec;139:104772. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104772. Epub 2023 Nov 7.
To determine the validity and reliability of novel digitalized tools for dental plaque detection and explore the benefits and limitations connected to their use.
Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews. All human clinical studies comparing dental plaque detection using digitalized systems against a standard reference were included.
PubMed and Scopus were screened from 01 January 2013 to 28 September 2023. Bibliographies of primary studies and principal peer-reviewed scientific journals were manually searched.
The initial search identified 576 articles, with a total of 13 included in the review, published between 2015 and 2023. Most of the studies included (77 %) were cross-sectional with three being prospective. Digital devices captured 2D and 3D images via cameras and intra-oral scanners, respectively. The Turesky's modified plaque index was the most frequent clinical index. Correlation with clinical examination was moderate to strong, with good to excellent intra- and inter-system agreement.
Within the limitations of this scoping review, image analysis-based plaque detection systems demonstrated good correlations with clinical plaque indices, using both 2D and 3D imaging systems. Whilst digital plaque detection devices offer advantages in terms of procedural standardization and reproducibility, they also have limitations, therefore currently, their application should be underpinned by a comprehensive clinical examination.
Digital plaque detection tools, that provide standardized measurements and store acquired images, facilitate more informed feedback to patients. This objective analysis may enhance clinician confidence in their utility for clinical trials and other applications.
确定新型数字化牙菌斑检测工具的有效性和可靠性，并探讨其使用的益处和局限性。
本研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析（PRISMA）扩展的首选报告项目（Scoping Reviews）进行报告。所有比较数字化系统与标准参考检测牙菌斑的人类临床研究均被纳入。
从 2013 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 9 月 28 日，在 PubMed 和 Scopus 中进行了筛选。还手动搜索了主要研究的参考文献和主要同行评议科学期刊。
最初的搜索确定了 576 篇文章，其中共有 13 篇文章被纳入综述，发表于 2015 年至 2023 年期间。大多数纳入的研究（77%）为横断面研究，其中 3 项为前瞻性研究。数字化设备分别通过摄像头和口腔内扫描仪获取 2D 和 3D 图像。最常使用的临床指数是改良的 Turesky 菌斑指数。与临床检查的相关性为中度至强，具有良好至极好的系统内和系统间一致性。
在本 scoping 综述的限制范围内，基于图像分析的菌斑检测系统与临床菌斑指数具有良好的相关性，同时使用 2D 和 3D 成像系统。虽然数字化菌斑检测设备在程序标准化和可重复性方面具有优势，但它们也存在局限性，因此目前，其应用应基于全面的临床检查。
提供标准化测量和存储采集图像的数字化菌斑检测工具，为患者提供更具参考性的反馈。这种客观分析可能会增强临床医生对其在临床试验和其他应用中的实用性的信心。
