An In Vivo Investigation of Diagnostic Performance of DIAGNOdent Pen and the Canary System for Assessment and Monitoring Enamel Caries under Fissure Sealants

Nada Jaafar, Hala Ragab, Ahmed Abedrahman, Essam Osman, Nada Jaafar, Hala Ragab, Ahmed Abedrahman, Essam Osman

Abstract

Aim and objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of a quantitative light-induced fluorescence (DIAGNOdent pen [DP]) and a photothermal radiometry (Canary System [CS]) for assessment and monitoring occlusal enamel caries under fissure sealants placed on young permanent teeth.

Materials and methods: Forty-five patients of mean age 9.96 (1.4) years, having at least two occlusal surface sites of non-cavitated lesions (International Caries Detection and Assessment System [ICDAS], 1-3 at baseline), were assigned for this clinical study as per specific inclusion/exclusion criteria. A total of 90 permanent teeth were examined using a visual examination method (ICDAS), a quantitative light-induced fluorescence (DP), and a photothermal radiometry (CS). Teeth were randomly divided into two groups based on the type of fissure sealants: a resin sealant and a glass-ionomer sealant. Sealants were placed over the study sites, and caries assessment was performed with each caries detection method at 3- and 6-month recall appointments. Numerical data were presented as mean, standard deviation, median, and interquartile range values. Qualitative data were presented as frequencies and percentages. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to determine the diagnostic accuracy measures of the two modalities and compared using z-statistic. ROC curve analysis was performed with MedCalc software, Ostend, Belgium, version 11.3 for Windows (MedCalc Software). Changes by time in caries progression were analyzed using McNemar test and Cochran Q test. The significance level was set at P ≤ 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed with the IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software for Windows, version 23.0 (IBM, Armonk, New York).

Results: The CS and DP were able to distinguish between sound and carious tissue beneath fully and partially retained sealants at 6-month follow-up with an accuracy of 46.7% and 33.4%, respectively.

Conclusion: The diagnostic performance of the CS and DP are acceptable and can be considered as useful adjunct tools in the clinical evaluation and monitoring the changes in enamel due to lesion progression under fissure sealants. However, in the clinical setting, sensitivity and specificity of these devices may be influenced by the sealant type, thickness, retention, and the differences in the lesion characteristics over time.

Keywords: Canary system; DIAGNOdent pen; International Caries Detection and Assessment System; fissure sealants; non-cavitated occlusal caries.

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Copyright: © 2020 Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Receiver operating characteristic curves of the two modalities for caries detection (Code 20 vs. all other codes) after 3 months
Figure 2
Figure 2
Receiver operating characteristic curves of the two modalities for caries detection (Code 20 vs. Code 12) after 3 months
Figure 3
Figure 3
Receiver operating characteristic curves of the two modalities for caries detection (Code 20 vs. all other codes) after 6 months
Figure 4
Figure 4
Receiver operating characteristic curves of the two modalities for caries detection (Code 20 vs. Code 13) after 6 months

References

    1. Kassebaum NJ, Bernabé E, Dahiya M, Bhandari B, Murray CJ, Marcenes W. Global burden of untreated caries: A systematic review and metaregression. J Dent Res. 2015;94:650–8.
    1. Silvertown JD, Wong BP, Abrams SH, Sivagurunathan KS, Mathews SM, Amaechi BT. Comparison of the Canary System and DIAGNOdent® for the in vitro detection of caries under opaque dental sealants. J Investig Clin Dent. 2017;8: 12239.
    1. Wright JT. Genomics of dental caries and caries risk assessment. In: Polverini PJ, editor. Personalized Oral Health Care. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2015. pp. 87–98.
    1. Mortensen D, Gizani S, Salamara O, Sifakakis I, Twetman S. Monitoring regression of post-orthodontic lesions with impedance spectroscopy: A pilot study. Eur J Orthodont. 2018;8:1–5.
    1. Pitts NB, Ekstrand KR ICDAS Foundation. International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) and its International Caries Classification and Management System (ICCMS)—Methods for staging of the caries process and enabling dentists to manage caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013;41:e41–52.
    1. Bahrololoomi Z, Ezoddini F, Halvani N. Comparison of radiography, laser fluorescence and visual examination for diagnosing incipient occlusal caries of permanent first molars. J Dent (Tehran) 2015;12:324–32.
    1. Betrisey E, Rizcalla N, Krejci I, Ardu S. Caries diagnosis using light fluorescence devices: VistaProof and DIAGNOdent. Odontology. 2014;102:330–5.
    1. Herzog K, D’Elia M, Kim A, Slayton RL. Pilot study of the canary system use in the diagnosis of approximal carious lesions in primary molars. Pediatr Dent. 2015;37:525–9.
    1. Mendes FM, Pontes LR, Gimenez T, Lara JS, de Camargo LB, Michel-Crosato E, et al. CARDEC Collaborative Group. Impact of the radiographic examination on diagnosis and treatment decision of caries lesions in primary teeth—The Caries Detection in Children (CARDEC-01) Trial: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2016;17:69.
    1. Virajsilp V, Thearmontree A, Aryatawong S, Paiboonwarachat D. Comparison of proximal caries detection in primary teeth between laser fluorescence and bitewing radiography. Pediatr Dent. 2005;27:493–9.
    1. Chu CH, Lo EC, You DS. Clinical diagnosis of fissure caries with conventional and laser-induced fluorescence techniques. Lasers Med Sci. 2010;25:355–62.
    1. Ismail AI, Sohn W, Tellez M, Amaya A, Sen A, Hasson H, et al. The International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS): An integrated system for measuring dental caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007;35:170–8.
    1. Diniz MB, Rodrigues JDA, Lussi A. Traditional and novel caries detection methods. In: Li M-Y, editor. Contemporary Approach to Dental Caries. IntechOpen; 2012. pp. 105–28.
    1. Diniz MB, Lima LM, Eckert G, Zandona AG, Cordeiro RC, Pinto LS. In vitro evaluation of ICDAS and radiographic examination of occlusal surfaces and their association with treatment decisions. Oper Dent. 2011;36:133–42.
    1. Diniz MB, Rodrigues JA, Hug I, Cordeiro RC, Lussi A. Reproducibility and accuracy of the ICDAS-II for occlusal caries detection. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2009;37:399–404.
    1. Ekstrand KR, Martignon S, Ricketts DJ, Qvist V. Detection and activity assessment of primary coronal caries lesions: A methodologic study. Oper Dent. 2007;32:225–35.
    1. Gomez J, Zakian C, Salsone S, Pinto SC, Taylor A, Pretty IA, et al. In vitro performance of different methods in detecting occlusal caries lesions. J Dent. 2013;41:180–6.
    1. Mitropoulos P, Rahiotis C, Kakaboura A, Vougiouklakis G. The impact of magnification on occlusal caries diagnosis with implementation of the ICDAS II criteria. Caries Res. 2012;46:82–6.
    1. Braga MM, Ekstrand KR, Martignon S, Imparato JC, Ricketts DN, Mendes FM. Clinical performance of two visual scoring systems in detecting and assessing activity status of occlusal caries in primary teeth. Caries Res. 2010;44:300–8.
    1. Ferreira Zandoná A, Santiago E, Eckert GJ, Katz BP, Pereira de Oliveira S, Capin OR, et al. The natural history of dental caries lesions: A 4-year observational study. J Dent Res. 2012;91:841–6.
    1. Jablonski-Momeni A, Stucke J, Steinberg T, Heinzel-Gutenbrunner M. Use of ICDAS-II, fluorescence-based methods, and radiography in detection and treatment decision of occlusal caries lesions: An in vitro study. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:1–8.
    1. Diniz MB, Lima LM, Santos-Pinto L, Eckert GJ, Zandoná AG, de Cássia Loiola Cordeiro R. Influence of the ICDAS e-learning program for occlusal caries detection on dental students. J Dent Educ. 2010;74:862–8.
    1. Nelson S, Eggertsson H, Powell B, Mandelaris J, Ntragatakis M, Richardson T, et al. Dental examiners consistency in applying the ICDAS criteria for a caries prevention community trial. Community Dent Health. 2011;28:238–42.
    1. Hellen A, Mandelis A, Finer Y, Amaechi BT. Quantitative evaluation of the kinetics of human enamel simulated caries using photothermal radiometry and modulated luminescence. J Biomed Opt. 2011;16:071406.
    1. Wright JT, Crall JJ, Fontana M, Gillette EJ, Nový BB, Dhar V, et al. Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants: A report of the American Dental Association and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 2016;147:672–682.e12.
    1. Shi XQ, Tranaeus S, Angmar-Månsson B. Comparison of QLF and DIAGNOdent for quantification of smooth surface caries. Caries Res. 2001;35:21–6.
    1. Nokhbatolfoghahaie H, Alikhasi M, Chiniforush N, Khoei F, Safavi N, Yaghoub Zadeh B. Evaluation of accuracy of DIAGNOdent in diagnosis of primary and secondary caries in comparison to conventional methods. J Lasers Med Sci. 2013;4:159–67.
    1. Iranzo-Cortés JE, Terzic S, Montiel-Company JM, Almerich-Silla JM. Diagnostic validity of ICDAS and DIAGNOdent combined: An in vitro study in pre-cavitated lesions. Lasers Med Sci. 2017;32:543–8.
    1. Dikmen B. ICDAS II criteria (International Caries Detection and Assessment System) J Istanb Univ Fac Dent. 2015;49: 63–72.
    1. Wong HB, Lim GH. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV. Proc Singapore Healthcare. 2011;20:316–18.
    1. Huysmans MC, Longbottom C. The challenges of validating diagnostic methods and selecting appropriate gold standards. J Dent Res. 2004;83:C48–52.
    1. Gostanian HV, Shey Z, Kasinathan C, Caceda J, Janal MN. An in vitro evaluation of the effect of sealant characteristics on laser fluorescence for caries detection. Pediatr Dent. 2006;28:445–50.
    1. Diniz MB, Rodrigues JA, Hug I, Cordeiro RC, Lussi A. The influence of pit and fissure sealants on infrared fluorescence measurements. Caries Res. 2008;42:328–33.
    1. Hastar E, Yildiz E, Aktan AM. The effect of fissure sealants on the values of two different caries detection devices. Photomed Laser Surg. 2012;30:683–7.
    1. Verdonschot EH, van der Veen MH. [Lasers in dentistry 2. Diagnosis of dental caries with lasers] Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2002;109:122–6.
    1. Barbería E, Maroto M, Arenas M, Silva CC. A clinical study of caries diagnosis with a laser fluorescence system. J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139:572–9.
    1. Angnes V, Angnes G, Batisttella M, Grande RH, Loguercio AD, Reis A. Clinical effectiveness of laser fluorescence, visual inspection and radiography in the detection of occlusal caries. Caries Res. 2005;39:490–5.
    1. Sheehy EC, Brailsford SR, Kidd EA, Beighton D, Zoitopoulos L. Comparison between visual examination and a laser fluorescence system for in vivo diagnosis of occlusal caries. Caries Res. 2001;35:421–6.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する