Performance of light-emitting diode device in detecting occlusal caries in the primary molars

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível

Data

2019-08-01

Orientador

Coorientador

Pós-graduação

Curso de graduação

Título da Revista

ISSN da Revista

Título de Volume

Editor

Springer

Tipo

Artigo

Direito de acesso

Acesso abertoAcesso Aberto

Resumo

This in vitro study aimed to compare the performance of a light-emitting diode (LED) device (Midwest Caries I.D.: MID), International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) visual criteria, and fluorescence-based devices (DIAGNOdent: LF; DIAGNOdent pen: LFpen; and Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence: QLF) in detecting occlusal caries in the primary molars. Eighty-eight primary molars with sound occlusal surfaces or carious lesions at different stages were assessed twice, with a 1-week interval in between, by one examiner using all three methods. Subsequently, the teeth were sectioned and lesion depth was verified using stereomicroscopy as a gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated at D-1 (all carious lesions-enamel and dentin) and D-3 (dentin lesions) thresholds. Correlation with histological analysis was evaluated using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (rho). Weighted Kappa and intraclass-correlation (ICC) coefficients were calculated to assess intra-examiner reproducibility. At D-1 threshold, ICDAS and LFpen showed higher sensitivity than the other methods, whereas ICDAS, LF, and QLF showed higher specificity (p<0.05), and MID showed lower accuracy. At D-3 threshold, ICDAS, LFpen, and QLF showed higher sensitivity than MID, whereas ICDAS, LF, and MID showed higher specificity (p<0.05). All methods, except MID, showed statistically similar accuracy values (p<0.05). Correlations with histopathological analysis varied from 0.15 (MID) to 0.57 (ICDAS). Intra-examiner reproducibility varied from 0.30 (MID) to 0.92 (ICDAS, LF, and QLF). The MID device exhibited a poor performance in detecting occlusal carious lesions in the primary molars, and ICDAS visual criteria exhibited greater accuracy than LF, LFpen, and QLF devices.

Descrição

Idioma

Inglês

Como citar

Lasers In Medical Science. London: Springer London Ltd, v. 34, n. 6, p. 1235-1241, 2019.

Itens relacionados