Peers A, Hill F J, Mitropoulos C M, Holloway P J
University Dental Hospital of Manchester, UK.
Caries Res. 1993;27(4):307-11. doi: 10.1159/000261556.
This study measured validity and reproducibility of unaided clinical diagnosis, fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI), and bite-wing radiology in the diagnosis of approximal caries. Sixty models were made using extracted premolars and molars, each containing four teeth with six contacting approximal surfaces. The teeth were examined first using unaided clinical examination and then using FOTI. Bite-wing radiographs were then taken of the teeth set in the models and examined. The three examinations were repeated after 1 week. Histological sections of the undecalcified teeth were prepared following their removal from the models, and those showing signs of caries were examined to give the valid state of disease in each surface. The diagnostic threshold was caries penetrating into dentine. The reproducibility of all three methods was acceptable with kappa values exceeding 0.6. All specificity values exceeded 0.95. Statistically significant differences were seen between sensitivities for clinical (0.38) and bite-wing (0.59) diagnosis and between clinical and FOTI (0.67) examination, but not between bite-wing and FOTI. It is concluded that the validity of FOTI is at least as high as that of bite-wing radiology, and both are superior to unaided clinical diagnosis.
本研究测定了在邻面龋诊断中,徒手临床诊断、光纤透照法(FOTI)和咬合翼片放射检查的有效性和可重复性。利用拔除的前磨牙和磨牙制作了60个模型,每个模型包含四颗牙齿及六个邻面接触区。首先通过徒手临床检查对牙齿进行检查,然后使用FOTI检查。接着对模型中的牙齿拍摄咬合翼片并进行检查。1周后重复这三项检查。从模型中取出牙齿后,制备未脱钙牙齿的组织学切片,对显示有龋损迹象的切片进行检查,以确定每个表面的疾病实际状态。诊断阈值为龋损侵入牙本质。所有三种方法的可重复性均可接受,kappa值超过0.6。所有特异性值均超过0.95。临床诊断(0.38)与咬合翼片诊断(0.59)的敏感性之间以及临床检查与FOTI检查(0.67)之间存在统计学显著差异,但咬合翼片与FOTI之间无差异。得出的结论是,FOTI的有效性至少与咬合翼片放射检查一样高,且两者均优于徒手临床诊断。