Diagnostic comparison of three groups of examiners using visual and laser fluorescence methods to detect occlusal caries in vitro

Impedance Spectroscopy as a Tool for the Detection of Occlusal Noncavitated Carious Lesions

A total 302 teeth (148 molars and 154 premolars) corresponding to 152 patients aged ≥18 years were evaluated for caries using the ICDAS (International Caries Detection and Assessment System), fluorescence (DD, DIAGNOdent) and electrical impedance (IMS, CarieScan PRO) systems. Fissurotomy and intraoral radiographs were used as the gold standard. Accordingly, 27.5% (n=84) of the teeth were classified as sound, while 26.9% (n=81) had enamel involvement and 45.6% (n=138) presented carious lesions reaching the dentin. Sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), and the area under the curve (AUC) were, respectively, 90.7%, 87.8%, and 0.954 (IMS); 92.4%, 92.7%, and 0.954 (DD); and 79.0%, 72.3%, and 0.756 (ICDAS). With regard to Se and Sp, there were significant differences between ICDAS and DD (p<0.001) and between ICDAS and IMS (p=0.01), but not between IMS and DD (p=0.07). In relation to AUC, there were significant differences between ICDAS and DD (p<0.001), and between ICDAS and IMS (p<0.001), but not between IMS and DD (p>0.05). The correlations between fissurotomy and each method were 88.7% (IMS), 89.7% (DD), and 77.1% (ICDAS). Within the limitations of this study, clinically, the electrical system is not useful for differentiating between sound teeth and truly incipient caries lesions by itself. The fluorescence or electrical systems are recommended with the ICDAS to detect carious lesions in their early stages.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic methods for occlusal surface caries

AIM

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of commonly used methods for occlusal caries diagnostics, such as visual examination (VE), bitewing radiography (BW) and laser fluorescence (LF), in relation to their ability to detect (dentin) caries under clinical and laboratory conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was performed to identify studies meeting the inclusion criteria using the PIRDS concept (N = 1090). A risk of bias (RoB) assessment tool was used for quality evaluation. Reports with low/moderate RoB, well-matching thresholds for index and reference tests and appropriate reporting were included in the meta-analysis (N = 37; 29 in vivo/8 in vitro). The pooled sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and areas under ROC curves (AUCs) were computed.

RESULTS

SP ranged from 0.50 (fibre-optic transillumination/caries detection level) to 0.97 (conventional BW/dentine detection level) in vitro. AUCs were typically higher for BW or LF than for VE. The highest AUC of 0.89 was observed for VE at the 1/3 dentin caries detection level; SE (0.70) was registered to be higher than SP (0.47) for VE at the caries detection level in vivo.

CONCLUSION

The number of included studies was found to be low. This underlines the need for high-quality caries diagnostic studies that further provide data in relation to multiple caries thresholds.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

VE, BW and LF provide acceptable measures for their diagnostic performance on occlusal surfaces, but the results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited data in many categories.

In vivo validation of Diagnodent and Vista proof devices vs ICDAS clinical criteria on incipient carious lesions in adults

AIM

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Fluorescence devices for the detection of dental caries

BACKGROUND

Caries is one of the most prevalent and preventable conditions worldwide. If identified early enough then non-invasive techniques can be applied, and therefore this review focusses on early caries involving the enamel surface of the tooth. The cornerstone of caries detection is a visual and tactile dental examination, however alternative methods of detection are available, and these include fluorescence-based devices. There are three categories of fluorescence-based device each primarily defined by the different wavelengths they exploit; we have labelled these groups as red, blue, and green fluorescence. These devices could support the visual examination for the detection and diagnosis of caries at an early stage of decay.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objectives were to estimate the diagnostic test accuracy of fluorescence-based devices for the detection and diagnosis of enamel caries in children or adults. We planned to investigate the following potential sources of heterogeneity: tooth surface (occlusal, proximal, smooth surface or adjacent to a restoration); single point measurement devices versus imaging or surface assessment devices; and the prevalence of more severe disease in each study sample, at the level of caries into dentine.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist undertook a search of the following databases: MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 30 May 2019); Embase Ovid (1980 to 30 May 2019); US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov, to 30 May 2019); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 30 May 2019). We studied reference lists as well as published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy study designs that compared a fluorescence-based device with a reference standard. This included prospective studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of single index tests and studies that directly compared two or more index tests. Studies that explicitly recruited participants with caries into dentine or frank cavitation were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently using a piloted study data extraction form based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported for each study. This information has been displayed as coupled forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) plots, displaying the sensitivity-specificity points for each study. We estimated diagnostic accuracy using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) methods. We reported sensitivities at fixed values of specificity (median 0.78, upper quartile 0.90).

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 133 studies, 55 did not report data in the 2 x 2 format and could not be included in the meta-analysis. 79 studies which provided 114 datasets and evaluated 21,283 tooth surfaces were included in the meta-analysis. There was a high risk of bias for the participant selection domain. The index test, reference standard, and flow and timing domains all showed a high proportion of studies to be at low risk of bias. Concerns regarding the applicability of the evidence were high or unclear for all domains, the highest proportion being seen in participant selection. Selective participant recruitment, poorly defined diagnostic thresholds, and in vitro studies being non-generalisable to the clinical scenario of a routine dental examination were the main reasons for these findings. The dominance of in vitro studies also means that the information on how the results of these devices are used to support diagnosis, as opposed to pure detection, was extremely limited. There was substantial variability in the results which could not be explained by the different devices or dentition or other sources of heterogeneity that we investigated. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 14.12 (95% CI 11.17 to 17.84). The estimated sensitivity, at a fixed median specificity of 0.78, was 0.70 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.75). In a hypothetical cohort of 1000 tooth sites or surfaces, with a prevalence of enamel caries of 57%, obtained from the included studies, the estimated sensitivity of 0.70 and specificity of 0.78 would result in 171 missed tooth sites or surfaces with enamel caries (false negatives) and 95 incorrectly classed as having early caries (false positives). We used meta-regression to compare the accuracy of the different devices for red fluorescence (84 datasets, 14,514 tooth sites), blue fluorescence (21 datasets, 3429 tooth sites), and green fluorescence (9 datasets, 3340 tooth sites) devices. Initially, we allowed threshold, shape, and accuracy to vary according to device type by including covariates in the model. Allowing consistency of shape, removal of the covariates for accuracy had only a negligible effect (Chi2 = 3.91, degrees of freedom (df) = 2, P = 0.14). Despite the relatively large volume of evidence we rated the certainty of the evidence as low, downgraded two levels in total, for risk of bias due to limitations in the design and conduct of the included studies, indirectness arising from the high number of in vitro studies, and inconsistency due to the substantial variability of results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variation in the performance of these fluorescence-based devices that could not be explained by the different wavelengths of the devices assessed, participant, or study characteristics. Blue and green fluorescence-based devices appeared to outperform red fluorescence-based devices but this difference was not supported by the results of a formal statistical comparison. The evidence base was considerable, but we were only able to include 79 studies out of 133 in the meta-analysis as estimates of sensitivity or specificity values or both could not be extracted or derived. In terms of applicability, any future studies should be carried out in a clinical setting, where difficulties of caries assessment within the oral cavity include plaque, staining, and restorations. Other considerations include the potential of fluorescence devices to be used in combination with other technologies and comparative diagnostic accuracy studies.

In Vitro Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy of DIAGNOdent and Digital Radiography for Detection of Secondary Proximal Caries Adjacent to Composite Restorations

Introduction: Early detection of secondary proximal caries is critical for the preservation of tooth vitality. This study sought to assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy of DIAGNOdent and digital radiography for detection of secondary proximal caries adjacent to composite restorations. Methods: Sixty extracted molars including 30 teeth with carious lesions and 30 sound teeth were randomly selected. Class II cavities were prepared in all teeth and carious dentin was intentionally left in the gingival floor of cavities in 30 carious teeth. All cavities were restored with composite resin. The teeth were mounted in wax blocks (three teeth per block) and examined for caries using (DIAGNOdent kaVo Dental, Biberach, Germany). Digital radiographs using DIGORA photostimulable phosphor (PSP) plates (Soredex Corporation, Helsinki, Finland) were obtained from all teeth using the parallel technique and were evaluated by 4 observers. Repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to calculate sensitivity and specificity values of the two diagnostic techniques. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted for DIAGNOdent results and based on that, the cutoff points were determined. Results: The sensitivity and specificity values at the cut-off point of 10.5 were 0.622±0.038 and 0.822±0.077 for DIAGNOdent and 0.591±0.093 and 0.891±0.083 for digital radiography, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was 0.7 for DIAGNOdent. Weighted kappa revealed moderate to almost perfect intra-observer agreement (0.46-0.99). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for DIAGNOdent was calculated to be 0.88. Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was noted in diagnostic accuracy of DIAGNOdent and digital radiography for detection of secondary proximal caries adjacent to composite restorations. Thus, DIAGNOdent may be used as an adjunct diagnostic tool for detection of secondary proximal caries beneath composite restorations.

Caries diagnosis using light fluorescence devices in comparison with traditional visual and tactile evaluation: a prospective study in 152 patients

The objective of the study was to evaluate the in vivo effectiveness of two fluorescence techniques (DIAGNOdent and VistaProof) and of visual and tactile evaluation in the diagnosis of occlusal caries in permanent teeth. A total of 302 teeth (molars and premolars) from 152 patients were studied. The occlusal surfaces were cleaned using pumice mixed with water, followed by application of the diagnostic methods according to the instructions of the manufacturer, and of the visual and tactile methods according to the recommendations. The true extent of the lesions was determined by fissurotomy. The sensitivity and specificity of visual diagnosis were 79 and 72 %, respectively, versus 53 and 98 % in the case of tactile diagnosis. Teeth with caries lesions exhibited significantly higher DIAGNOdent and VistaProof scores than those without caries. Using the optimum cutoff point of 23.5 obtained in our study for DIAGNOdent, sensitivity and specificity were found to be 92.4 and 92.7 %, respectively, while values of 88.1 and 95.1 % were obtained with a cutoff point of 28.5. Sensitivity in the case of the VistaProof system varied between 92.9 % (cutoff point 1.05) and 85.3 % (cutoff point 1.3), with respective specificity values of 95.8 and 88.6 %. The areas under the curve were 0.756, 0.759, 0.954 and 0.965 for the visual and tactile methods and for DIAGNOdent and VistaProof, respectively. The fluorescence-based techniques showed greater internal and external validity than the visual and tactile methods in diagnosing occlusal caries in permanent teeth. VistaProof is the best method for diagnosing caries in its early stages.

Optimal power settings of aluminum gallium arsenide lasers in caries inhibition - An in vitro study

Context:

Incipient carious lesions are characterized by subsurface dissolution due to more fluoride ions in the 50-100 microns of the tooth's outer surface.

Aims:

To determine an optimal power setting for 810 nm aluminum gallium arsenide laser for caries inhibition.

Materials and Methods:

Fifty-four caries-free extracted teeth were sectioned mesiodistally. The samples were divided into 18 groups for each power setting being evaluated. Each group had six samples. The laser used is 810 nm aluminum gallium arsenide laser with power setting from 0.1 watts to 5 watts. Laser fluorescence based device was used to evaluate the effect of irradiation.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Paired “t” test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Tukey's post hoc test, and the Pearson's correlation test.

Results:

The paired t-test showed that there is minimum divergence from the control for 3.5 watts. Tukey's post hoc test also showed statistically significantly results for 3.5 watts. The Pearson's correlation test showed that there was negative correlation between the watts and irradiation.

Conclusions:

The power setting that gave statistically significant results was 3.5 watts.

Influence of professional experience on detection and treatment decision of occlusal caries lesions in primary teeth

AIM

To evaluate the influence of examiner's clinical experience on detection and treatment decision of caries lesions in primary molars.

DESIGN

Three experienced dentists (Group A) and three undergraduate students (Group B) used the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) criteria and bitewing radiographs (BW) to perform examinations twice in 77 primary molars that presented a sound or carious occlusal surface. For the treatment decision (TD), the examiners attributed scores, analyzing the teeth in conjunction with the radiographs. The presence and the depth of lesion were validated histologically, and reproducibility was evaluated. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the ROC curve values were calculated for ICDAS and BW. The associations between ICDAS, BW, and TD were analyzed by means of contingency tables.

RESULTS

Interexaminer agreement for ICDAS, BW, and TD were excellent for Group B and moderate for Group A. The two groups presented similar and satisfactory performance for caries lesion detection using ICDAS and BW. In the treatment decision, Group A was shown to have a less invasive approach than Group B.

CONCLUSION

The examiner's experience was not determinant for the clinical and radiographic detection of occlusal lesions in primary teeth but influenced the treatment decision of initial lesions.

Evaluating performance of dental caries detection methods among third-year dental students

Background

Reliable caries detection is a cornerstone in the modern caries treatment schema. This study aimed to evaluate adopting traditional and new caries detection methods by third-year dental students.

Methods

Fifty-seven students were given lectures on caries detection, after which they evaluated 27 extracted carious teeth using traditional clinical assessment (CE), Nyvad’s, and ICDAS methods. On three teeth they also performed DIAGNOdent pen® (LF) scanning. Histological scores of the sectioned teeth (ICDAS, LF) and activity estimations of the lesions by the supervisors were used as golden standards (Nyvad, CE). For the ICDAS method , sensitivity and specificity were calculated using dentine caries (D3) as a cut-off point. Mean ICC and kappa values were calculated to evaluate interexaminer agreement for all lesions and methods. Spearman’s correlation coefficient evaluated LF scanning.

Results

ICDAS method presented good sensitivity (0.78) and specificity (0.87). The inter-examiner agreement for different methods was fair or good (CE ICC = 0.69, κ = 0.53; Nyvad’s method ICC = 0.68, κ = 0.48, ICDAS ICC = 0.66, κ = 0.47). Variation in LF values was the greatest with lesions extending to middle third of dentin. In that case, the Spearman’s correlation coefficient was also the weakest.

Conclusions

To follow the guidelines by the European Core Curriculum on Cariology, the third year dental students are introduced to methods for detecting lesion depth and assessing lesion activity as well as using new caries detection methods. Their performance in estimating lesion depth is good, and fair to good in estimating lesion activity even after basic training only.

In vivo performance of the VistaProof fluorescence-based camera for detection of occlusal lesions

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the in-vivo performance of the VistaProof fluorescence-based camera (VP) on occlusal surfaces.

METHODS

The study was approved by the ethics committee and informed consent was given by the participants. The study included 306 unrestored permanent teeth of 26 patients. The occlusal surfaces of the teeth were examined visually using International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) criteria. Then, digital images of the surfaces were made using the VP. The actual depth of the lesions was assessed using radiographs and/or clinically by opening the lesion when appropriate. Correlation between all methods was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r s ). Sensitivity (SE) and specificity (SP) were calculated at D1-(enamel lesions) and D3-(dentine caries) diagnostic threshold and area under the ROC curve (AUC) were assessed.

RESULTS

Significant positive correlation was found between ICDAS, VP measurements and the reference standard (r s 0.46-0.71, p < 0.01). SE and SP were at D1-diagnostic threshold level 92.3 and 41.1 %, respectively. At D3-diagnostic threshold, SE was 25.9 % and SP 97.9 %. The diagnostic performance (AUC) was 0.82 (D1) and 0.85 (D3). Combination of VP measurements with ICDAS showed the SE value of 74.1 % at D3-diagnostic threshold.

CONCLUSION

The VP showed good diagnostic performance. The combination of VP measurements with ICDAS improved the SE in detecting dentine lesions.

Influence of examiner experience on clinical performance of visual inspection in detecting and assessing the activity status of caries lesions

Our hypothesis was that a method of caries activity evaluation based on the clinical features of the lesions would be less time consuming but more influenced by the examiner's experience than the scoring system used in association with the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS). Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of three groups of examiners with different levels of experience using two different methods to assess the activity status of caries lesions by visual inspection. A cross-sectional study in a dental office setting was performed selecting 18 children, aged three to eight years, who had sought dental treatment at a dental school. Examinations to detect caries lesions were performed using visual inspection by six examiners with different levels of experience: two undergraduate dental students, two specialists in pediatric dentistry, and two graduate students. The examiners used ICDAS and two different methods to assess caries activity: using an additional score system or considering the examination of clinical features. Two benchmark examiners examined the children in a joint session, and their consensus was considered to be the reference standard. The sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility were calculated for different thresholds: all, cavitated, and active caries lesions. Multilevel analyses were performed to compare the different methods and examiners. No differences were observed among the examiners, either in detecting all lesions and cavitated lesions or regarding the activity assessment. The methods of assessing activity status performed similarly, but the time spent on examinations was shorter for the method evaluating clinical features. In conclusion, the experience of examiners does not significantly influence the performance of visual inspection, and both methods of assessing activity status result in similar diagnostic accuracy.

The Effect of Pit and Fissure Sealants on the Detection of Occlusal Caries in vitro

AIMS

To compare, in vitro, the effect of placing opaque (OPS) and clear fluorescing (CFS) pit and fissure sealants (PFS) on the detection of occlusal caries (OCD).

STUDY DESIGN

Occlusal surfaces of 67 extracted molars were examined under standardised conditions by 6 final year undergraduate dental students, using visual, bitewing radiography, transillumination (FOTI), laser fluorescence (LF) and tactile methods of caries detection. The teeth were then assigned randomly to two groups for PFS placement: OPS and CFS; then the OCD methods were repeated. Caries presence/absence was determined histologically on serial sections examined under stereo-microscopy (10x).

RESULTS

Before PFS placement the sensitivity and specificity for the OCD methods were: visual: 68%, 71%; radiographic: 15%, 95%; FOTI: 36%, 93%; LF: 49%, 83% and tactile: 39%, 67%, respectively. After placement of OPS, the sensitivity of LF (20%) and visual (13%) methods decreased and specificity increased (93%, 98% respectively). Placement of CFS resulted in minor changes in sensitivity and specificity. Correlation (Spearman's Rho coefficients) between OCD methods and histological intra-dentinal caries for pre- PFS, OPS, and CFS were: visual: 0.38, 0.34, 0.33; FOTI: 0.42, 0.35, 0.43; and LF: 0.41, 0.30, and 0.45 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of all OCD methods was low, as well as their correlation to the histological gold standard. Placing OPS further decreased the sensitivity of LF and visual methods, whereas placing CFS had little effect on all OCD methods. It is recommended that tactile detection of occlusal caries should be discontinued, and the probe used only to clean the pits and fissures gently for more accurate visual detection, or prior to pit and fissure sealant placement. Further research into the development of an affordable, robust, accurate and easy to use method for OCD is required.

Validity and reliability of methods for the detection of secondary caries around amalgam restorations in primary teeth

Secondary caries has been reported as the main reason for restoration replacement. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the performance of different methods--visual inspection, laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent), radiography and tactile examination--for secondary caries detection in primary molars restored with amalgam. Fifty-four primary molars were photographed and 73 suspect sites adjacent to amalgam restorations were selected. Two examiners evaluated independently these sites using all methods. Agreement between examiners was assessed by the Kappa test. To validate the methods, a caries-detector dye was used after restoration removal. The best cut-off points for the sample were found by a Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analysis, and the area under the ROC curve (Az), and the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the methods were calculated for enamel (D2) and dentine (D3) thresholds. These parameters were found for each method and then compared by the McNemar test. The tactile examination and visual inspection presented the highest inter-examiner agreement for the D2 and D3 thresholds, respectively. The visual inspection also showed better performance than the other methods for both thresholds (Az = 0.861 and Az = 0.841, respectively). In conclusion, the visual inspection presented the best performance for detecting enamel and dentin secondary caries in primary teeth restored with amalgam.

In Vitro Detection of Secondary Caries Associated with Composite Restorations on Approximal Surfaces Using Laser Fluorescence

Detecting secondary caries is difficult when using the visual-tactile examination. This study showed that the laser fluorescence device can be an auxiliary method for the detection of lesions associated with composite restorations on approximal surfaces.

In situ and in vitro comparison of laser fluorescence with visual inspection in detecting occlusal caries lesions

The aim of this study was to compare the in situ and in vitro performances of a laser fluorescence (LF) device (DIAGNOdent 2095) with visual inspection for the detection of occlusal caries in permanent teeth. Sixty-four sites were selected, and visual inspection and LF assessments were carried out, in vitro, three times by two independent examiners, with a 1-week interval between evaluations. Afterwards, the occlusal surfaces were mounted on the palatal portion of removable acrylic orthodontic appliances and placed in six volunteers. Assessments were repeated and validated by histological analysis of the tooth sections under a stereomicroscope. For both examiners, the highest intra-examiner values were observed for the visual inspection when in vitro and in situ evaluations were compared. The inter-examiner reproducibility varied from 0.61 to 0.64, except for the in vitro assessment using LF, which presented a lower value (0.43). The methods showed high specificity at the D(1) threshold (considering enamel and dentin caries as disease). In vitro evaluations showed the highest values of sensitivity for both methods when compared to the in situ evaluations at D(1) and D(2) (considering only dentinal caries as the disease) thresholds. For both methods, the results of sensitivity (at D(1) and D(2)) and accuracy (at D(1)) showed significant differences between in vitro and in situ conditions. However, the sensitivity (at D(1) and D(2)), specificity and accuracy (both at D(1)) of the methods were not significantly different when the same condition was considered. It can be concluded that visual inspection and LF showed better performance in vitro than in situ.

Student Versus Faculty Performance Using a New Visual Criteria for the Detection of Caries on Occlusal Surfaces: An In Vitro Examination with Histological Validation

One of the first actions that needs to be taken to disseminate the new visual caries detection criteria ICDAS is to assess how it is assimilated by different groups and levels of experience.

Validity of caries detection on occlusal surfaces and treatment decisions based on results from multiple caries-detection methods

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate whether having results available from multiple detection methods influences dentist's treatment decisions for incipient caries lesions on occlusal surfaces. The occlusal surface of 96 extracted permanent molars without frank cavitation was examined by three examiners initially by visual examination alone, following which they chose one of three treatment options: (i) no treatment, (ii) preventive or non-invasive treatment (sealants), and (iii) invasive treatment. Four weeks later the examiners again selected one of the three treatment options for the surfaces, but this time were able to refer to the results from additional caries-detection methods [bitewing radiographs, electric conductance measurement (ECM), quantitative light fluorescence (QLF), and DIAGNOdent] that had been performed in the interim time. Stereomicroscopy was used to evaluate sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for the detection methods at the D1 diagnostic threshold. Slight improvement was obtained in the percentage of sites correctly diagnosed, and in the AUC, when referring to the results obtained from all detection methods compared with visual examination alone. However, a drastic effect on the selection of treatment options was observed by having results available from multiple methods, with the choice of invasive treatment increasing substantially. In conclusion, having data available from multiple methods did not improve the accuracy of examiners in detecting early occlusal caries lesions, but it had a great influence on the number of surfaces indicated for operative treatment. The potential decrease in overall specificity while using multiple methods of detection may be of concern in populations with a low prevalence of occlusal caries lesions.

Validity and reproducibility of different combinations of methods for occlusal caries detection: an in vitro comparison

This study assessed the validity and reproducibility of different combinations of occlusal caries detection methods: visual examination (VE), laser fluorescence (LF) and radiographic examination (RE). Intra- and interexaminer reproducibilities were also assessed. Forty-seven extracted human molars were used and 121 sites, either suspected or not to be carious, were chosen. Occlusal surfaces were examined by 8 volunteers, assigned to three groups according to their level of knowledge and clinical experience on dental practice: group I, undergraduate students; group II, postgraduate students; group III, professors. Three combinations of methods were tested: A: VE+LF, B: VE+RE, C: VE+LF+RE. The examiners scored the sites using ranking scales and chose a final score based on their clinical experience. The gold standard was determined by histological examination of the sites. In general, LF and RE yielded poorer results than the combinations of methods. For combination A, group III showed the highest sensitivity, while group II showed the highest specificity. For combination B, group II showed moderate sensitivity whereas groups I and III exhibited low sensitivities; all groups of examiners reached substantial specificity. For combination C, all groups exhibited moderate sensitivity and substantial specificity. Interexaminer reproducibility ranged from fair to moderate for combinations A and C, while for combination B kappa values indicated moderate interexaminer reproducibility. It may be concluded that individual exams presented inferior performance than the conjunction of them. Combination C (VE+LF+RE) resulted in the best accuracy for all groups. The knowledge background of the examiners influenced their ability to detect caries lesions and affected interexaminer reproducibility.

Should a dental explorer be used to probe suspected carious lesions? Yes--an explorer is a time-tested tool for caries detection

The caries rate is dropping worldwide, a fact that appears to have no relationship to whether dentists in the affected countries use an explorer to probe suspected carious lesions. Questions have been raised about this procedure on the basis of the purported inaccuracy of its contribution to caries diagnosis, its possible spread of infective plaque from other teeth in the mouth or the damage it can cause to pits and fissures. Longterm randomized clinical trials are necessary in these areas of question, trials that use endpoints that are clear and meaningful to clinical dentists. Until the time comes that facts emerge from acceptable long-term clinical trials, dentists should feel comfortable using the dental explorer to probe suspected carious lesions.