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

Fausto Medeiros Mendes, Laura Regina Antunes Pontes, Thais Gimenez, Juan Sebastian Lara, Lucila Basto de Camargo, Edgard Michel-Crosato, Claudio Mendes Pannuti, Daniela Prócida Raggio, Mariana Minatel Braga, Tatiane Fernandes Novaes, CARDEC Collaborative Group, Fausto Medeiros Mendes, Laura Regina Antunes Pontes, Thais Gimenez, Juan Sebastian Lara, Lucila Basto de Camargo, Edgard Michel-Crosato, Claudio Mendes Pannuti, Daniela Prócida Raggio, Mariana Minatel Braga, Tatiane Fernandes Novaes, CARDEC Collaborative Group

Abstract

Background: Although most clinical guidelines throughout the world indicate that clinicians take two bitewings for detecting caries lesions in primary molars of all children, evidence for this recommendation is essentially based on cross-sectional studies performed in laboratory settings or using convenience samples. The benefits and impact of performing radiographs on diagnosis and treatment decision of caries lesions in primary teeth, mainly considering relevant outcomes for patients, have not been evaluated yet. Thus, the aim of this randomized clinical trial will be to evaluate the impact of performing radiographic examination adjunct to the visual inspection for detecting and making treatment decision regarding caries lesions in primary teeth compared with visual inspection performed alone. We will consider different outcomes related to children's health and welfare.

Methods/design: To reach this objective, 250 children ages 3 to 6 years who sought dental treatment in our dental school will be randomly allocated in two groups according to the diagnostic strategy used for caries detection: visual inspection performed alone or visual inspection associated to radiographic examination. Two trained and calibrated examiners will carry out the examinations and elaborate the treatment decision plan. Then, children will be treated and followed up for 2 years, with evaluations after 12 and 24 months after the inclusion of children in the study. Children will also return after 6 and 18 months to reinforce the preventive orientations. Primary outcome will be the number of dental surfaces in need of dental treatment at the follow-up. Secondary outcomes will be the components of the primary outcome separately, as well as, proportion of false-positive results, the oral health-related quality of life, cost-efficacy, cost-adjusted life years, and number of new lesions in the first permanent molars.

Discussion: Our working hypothesis is that radiographic examination would actually exert little influence on patient-centered outcomes, and visual inspection would be enough as diagnostic strategy for caries detection in primary teeth.

Trial registration: NCT02078453. Registered 4 March 2015.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Timeline of the study procedures
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
CARDEC trial logotype

References

    1. Braga MM, Mendes FM, Ekstrand KR. Detection activity assessment and diagnosis of dental caries lesions. Dent Clin North Am. 2010;54:479–93. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2010.03.006.
    1. Bader JD, Shugars DA, Bonito AJ. A systematic review of the performance of methods for identifying carious lesions. J Public Health Dent. 2002;62:201–13. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2002.tb03446.x.
    1. Nyvad B, Machiulskiene V, Baelum V. Construct and predictive validity of clinical caries diagnostic criteria assessing lesion activity. J Dent Res. 2003;82:117–22. doi: 10.1177/154405910308200208.
    1. Guedes RS, Piovesan C, Ardenghi TM, Emmanuelli B, Braga MM, Ekstrand KR, et al. Validation of visual caries activity assessment: a 2-years cohort study. J Dent Res. J Dent Res. 2014;93:101S–107S. doi: 10.1177/0022034514531017.
    1. AAPD Guideline on pediatric restorative dentistry. Pediatr Dent. 2008;30(7 Suppl):163–9.
    1. Espelid I, Mejare I, Weerheijm K. EAPD guidelines for use of radiographs in children. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2003;4:40–8.
    1. Cordeiro RCL, Abreu-e-Lima F. Indication of dental radiographs in pediatric dentistry; in Massara MLA, Rédua PCB (eds): Reference Manual for Clinical Procedures in Pediatric Dentistry (article in Portuguese). São Paulo: Santos; 2009.
    1. Novaes TF, Matos R, Braga MM, Imparato JC, Raggio DP, Mendes FM. Performance of a pen-type laser fluorescence device and conventional methods in detecting approximal caries lesions in primary teeth--in vivo study. Caries Res. 2009;43:36–42. doi: 10.1159/000189705.
    1. Norlund A, Axelsson S, Dahlen G, Espelid I, Mejare I, Tranaeus S, et al. Economic aspects of the detection of occlusal dentine caries. Acta Odontol Scand. 2009;67:38–43. doi: 10.1080/00016350802549106.
    1. Baelum V, Heidmann J, Nyvad B. Dental caries paradigms in diagnosis and diagnostic research. Eur J Oral Sci. 2006;114:263–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2006.00383.x.
    1. Baelum V. What is an appropriate caries diagnosis? Acta Odontol Scand. 2010;68:65–79. doi: 10.3109/00016350903530786.
    1. Mendes FM, Novaes TF, Matos R, Bittar DG, Piovesan C, Gimenez T, et al. Radiographic and laser fluorescence methods have no benefits for detecting caries in primary teeth. Caries Res. 2012;46:536–43. doi: 10.1159/000341189.
    1. Baelum V, Hintze H, Wenzel A, Danielsen B, Nyvad B. Implications of caries diagnostic strategies for clinical management decisions. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012;40:257–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2011.00655.x.
    1. WHO . Oral health surveys, basic methods. 4. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1997.
    1. Paula MVQ, Fenyo-Pereira M. Quality control in periapical radiographs: standards of exposure and development. (article in Portuguese) Rev Assoc Paul Cir Dent. 2001;55:355–60.
    1. Tesch FC, Oliveira BH, Leao A. Semantic equivalence of the Brazilian version of the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale. Cad Saude Publica. 2008;24:1897–909. doi: 10.1590/S0102-311X2008000800018.
    1. Martins-Junior PA, Ramos-Jorge J, Paiva SM, Marques LS, Ramos-Jorge ML. Validations of the Brazilian version of the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (ECOHIS) Cad Saude Publica. 2012;28:367–74. doi: 10.1590/S0102-311X2012000200015.
    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. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00347.x.
    1. Nyvad B, Machiulskiene V, Baelum V. Reliability of a new caries diagnostic system differentiating between active and inactive caries lesions. Caries Res. 1999;33:252–60. doi: 10.1159/000016526.
    1. Ricketts DN, Kidd EA, Innes N, Clarkson J. Complete or ultraconservative removal of decayed tissue in unfilled teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;3:CD003808.
    1. de Amorim RG, Leal SC, Frencken JE. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16:429–41. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0513-3.
    1. Tedesco TK, Bonifacio CC, Calvo AF, Gimenez T, Braga MM, Raggio DP. Caries lesion prevention and arrestment in approximal surfaces in contact with glass ionomer cement restorations - A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2015
    1. Mufti AS. Clinical efficacy of the conventional glass ionomer cement and resin modified glass ionomer cement in primary molars. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2014;26:587–90.
    1. Gibson G, Jurasic MM, Wehler CJ, Jones JA. Supplemental fluoride use for moderate and high caries risk adults: a systematic review. J Public Health Dent. 2011;71:171–84.
    1. Walsh T, Worthington HV, Glenny AM, Appelbe P, Marinho VC, Shi X. Fluoride toothpastes of different concentrations for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;1:CD007868.
    1. Harris R, Gamboa A, Dailey Y, Ashcroft A. One-to-one dietary interventions undertaken in a dental setting to change dietary behaviour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;3:CD006540.
    1. Cerqueira DF, Mello-Moura AC, Santos EM, Guedes-Pinto AC. Cytotoxicity, histopathological, microbiological and clinical aspects of an endodontic iodoform-based paste used in pediatric dentistry: a review. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2008;32:105–10. doi: 10.17796/jcpd.32.2.k1wx5571h2w85430.
    1. Editorial Board JOE. Endodontic-periodontal interrelationships: an online study guide. J Endod. 2008;34(5 Suppl):e71–7.
    1. Kawai Y, Murakami H, Takanashi Y, Lund JP, Feine JS. Efficient resource use in simplified complete denture fabrication. J Prosthodont. 2010;19:512–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00628.x.
    1. Takanashi Y, Penrod JR, Lund JP, Feine JS. A cost comparison of mandibular two-implant overdenture and conventional denture treatment. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17:181–6.
    1. Weinstein P, Spiekerman C, Milgrom P. Randomized equivalence trial of intensive and semiannual applications of fluoride varnish in the primary dentition. Caries Res. 2009;43:484–90. doi: 10.1159/000264686.
    1. Qvist V, Poulsen A, Teglers PT, Mjor IA. The longevity of different restorations in primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2010;20:1–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2009.01017.x.
    1. Tickle M, Blinkhorn AS, Milsom KM. The occurrence of dental pain and extractions over a 3-year period in a cohort of children aged 3–6 years. J Public Health Dent. 2008;68:63–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2007.00048.x.
    1. Sackett DL, Haynes RB. The architecture of diagnostic research. BMJ. 2002;324:539–41. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7336.539.
    1. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, Bonsel GJ, Prins MH, van der Meulen JH, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA. 1999;282:1061–6. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.11.1061.
    1. Gimenez T, Piovesan C, Braga MM, Raggio DP, Deery C, Ricketts DN, et al. Visual Inspection for Caries Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2015;94:895–904. doi: 10.1177/0022034515586763.
    1. Gimenez T, Braga MM, Raggio DP, Deery C, Ricketts DN, Mendes FM. Fluorescence-based methods for detecting caries lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and sources of heterogeneity. PLoS One. 2013;8:e60421. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060421.
    1. Schwendicke F, Tzschoppe M, Paris S. Radiographic caries detection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2015;43:924–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.02.009.
    1. Gimenez T, Piovesan C, Braga MM, Raggio DP, Deery C, Ricketts DN, et al. Clinical relevance of studies on the accuracy of visual inspection for detecting caries lesions: a systematic review. Caries Res. 2015;49:91–8. doi: 10.1159/000365948.
    1. Health Quality Ontario Cancer screening with digital mammography for women at average risk for breast cancer, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for women at high risk: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2010;10:1–55.
    1. Fuller MS, Lee CI, Elmore JG. Breast cancer screening: an evidence-based update. Med Clin North Am. 2015;99:451–68. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2015.01.002.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever