Schulz-Weidner Nelly, Gruber Marina, Wöstmann Bernd, Uebereck Constanze Friederike, Krämer Norbert, Schlenz Maximiliane Amelie
Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Clinic, Justus Liebig University, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392 Giessen, Germany.
Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, Justus Liebig University, Schlangenzahl 14, 35392 Giessen, Germany.
J Clin Med. 2024 Feb 6;13(4):925. doi: 10.3390/jcm13040925.
The aim of this clinical study was to compare the occlusal caries detection (OCD) performance of the intraoral scanners (IOSs) Trios 4 (TIO, 3Shape) and Emerald S (EME, Planmeca) and the Diagnocam (DIA, KaVo) with the established visual (WHO) examination (VIS, reference method). Between 08/2022 and 02/2023, 60 children (mean age 9.6 ± 2.5 years) were examined as part of their regular dental checkups. OCD was performed at the tooth level, separately for primary and permanent unrestored teeth. Furthermore, two thresholds were analyzed: sound versus overall caries (pooled data of enamel and dentin caries, TH1) and pooled data of sound and enamel caries versus dentin caries (TH2). The best agreement with the reference method (reliability) in both dentitions was obtained for DIA (ĸ = 0.829/ĸ = 0.846; primary/permanent teeth), followed by EME (ĸ = 0.827/ĸ = 0.837) and TIO (ĸ = 0.714/ĸ = 0.680). Similar results were shown for the diagnostic quality (sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve), with higher values for TH1 than for TH2. Both IOSs and the DIA showed worse results than the reference method VIS. Currently, IOS should be used as an additional caries detection tool, especially for visualization, and cannot be recommended as a basic tool for diagnosis or invasive/noninvasive therapy decisions in OCD.
本临床研究的目的是比较口内扫描仪(IOS)Trios 4(TIO,3Shape公司)、Emerald S(EME,普兰梅卡公司)和Diagnocam(DIA,卡瓦公司)与既定的视觉(世界卫生组织)检查(VIS,参考方法)在咬合面龋检测(OCD)方面的性能。在2022年8月至2023年2月期间,60名儿童(平均年龄9.6±2.5岁)作为其定期牙科检查的一部分接受了检查。OCD在牙齿水平上进行,分别针对未修复的乳牙和恒牙。此外,分析了两个阈值:健康与总体龋坏(釉质龋和牙本质龋的汇总数据,TH1)以及健康和釉质龋与牙本质龋的汇总数据(TH2)。在两种牙列中,DIA与参考方法(可靠性)的一致性最佳(κ = 0.829/κ = 0.846;乳牙/恒牙),其次是EME(κ = 0.827/κ = 0.837)和TIO(κ = 0.714/κ = 0.680)。诊断质量(敏感性、特异性和受试者操作特征曲线下面积)的结果相似,TH1的值高于TH2。两种IOS和DIA的结果均比参考方法VIS差。目前,IOS应作为一种额外的龋病检测工具使用,特别是用于可视化,不能被推荐作为OCD诊断或侵入性/非侵入性治疗决策的基本工具。