Clinical performance of a diode laser fluorescence device for the detection of occlusal caries in primary teeth

The Assessability of Approximal Secondary Caries of Non-Invasive 3D-Printed Veneers Depending on the Restoration Thickness-An In Vitro Study

To date, no scientific data is available regarding the development and radiographic assessment of approximal caries development after the insertion of 3D-printed, non-invasive veneers of different restoration thicknesses. For the present study, non-invasive veneers were fabricated from two different materials for printing and milling (Vita Enamic and VarseoSmile Crown plus). Three different restoration thicknesses (0.5, 0.7, and 0.9 mm) were selected. After digital design, leaving the approximal space free, and manufacturing of the restorations, adhesive insertion followed. All specimens were placed in a demineralizing solution for 28 days. Subsequently, a radiological and fluorescent examination was performed. The present study showed statistically significant interactions for the day (p < 0.0001) and manufacturing method (p < 0.0001) but not for restoration thickness. Additive manufactured restorations showed less radiological caries progression compared to subtractive manufactured restorations after 21 and 28 days (0.7 and 0.9 mm restoration thickness) (p < 0.0001). DIAGNOdent proved that the restoration thickness affected the caries progression within the subtractive group (p < 0.0001). Radiographic and fluorescence examination showed equivalent results regarding approximal caries assessment. For additive manufacturing, less caries progression was shown without consideration of the restoration thickness.

Detection Methods for Early Caries Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim was to appraise the evidence on the performance of various means for the detection of incipient caries in vivo. Five databases of published and unpublished research were searched for studies from January 2000 to October 2019. Search terms included "early caries" and "caries detection." Inclusion criteria involved diagnostic test accuracy studies for early caries detection in permanent and primary teeth. A risk-of-bias assessment was performed using the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed the study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment in duplicate. The review protocol was a priori registered in the Open Science Framework. Of the initially 22,964 search results, 51 articles were included. For permanent teeth, when histologic examination was considered as the reference for occlusal surfaces, the sensitivity (Se) range appeared high for the DIAGNOdent Pen (DD Pen) at 0.81-0.89, followed by ICDAS-II at 0.62-1, DIAGNOdent (DD) at 0.48-1, and bitewing radiography (BW) at 0-0.29. The corresponding specificity (Sp) range was: DD Pen 0.71-0.8, ICDAS-II 0.5-0.84, DD 0.54-1, and BW 0.96-1. When operative intervention served as the reference for occlusal surfaces, again, the DD means valued the most promising results on Se: DD 0.7-0.96 and DD Pen 0.55-0.90, followed by ICDAS-II 0.25-0.93, and BW 0-0.83. The Sp range was: DD 0.54-1, DD Pen 0.71-1, ICDAS-II 0.44-1, and BW 0.6-1. For approximal surfaces, the Se was: BW 0.75-0.83, DD Pen 0.6, and ICDAS-II 0.54; the Sp was: BW 0.6-0.9, DD Pen 0.2, and ICDAS-II 1. For primary teeth, under the reference of histologic assessment, the Se range for occlusal surfaces was: DD 0.55-1, DD Pen 0.63-1, ICDAS-II 0.42-1, and BW 0.31-0.96; the respective Sp was: DD 0.5-1, DD Pen 0.44-1, ICDAS-II 0.61-1, and BW 0.79-0.98. For approximal surfaces, the Se range was: DD Pen 0.58-0.63, ICDAS-II 0.42-0.55, and BW 0.14-0.71. The corresponding Sp range was: DD Pen 0.85-0.87, ICDAS-II 0.73-0.93, and BW 0.79-0.98. Se and Sp values varied, due to the heterogeneity regarding the setting of individual studies. Evidently, robust conclusions cannot be drawn, and different diagnostic means should be used as adjuncts to clinical examination. In permanent teeth, visual examination may be enhanced by DD on occlusal surfaces and BW on approximal surfaces. In primary teeth, DD Pen may serve as a supplementary tool across all surfaces.

Visual or visual-tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries

BACKGROUND

The detection and diagnosis of caries at the initial (non-cavitated) and moderate (enamel) levels of severity is fundamental to achieving and maintaining good oral health and prevention of oral diseases. An increasing array of methods of early caries detection have been proposed that could potentially support traditional methods of detection and diagnosis. Earlier identification of disease could afford patients the opportunity of less invasive treatment with less destruction of tooth tissue, reduce the need for treatment with aerosol-generating procedures, and potentially result in a reduced cost of care to the patient and to healthcare services.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of different visual classification systems for the detection and diagnosis of non-cavitated coronal dental caries for different purposes (detection and diagnosis) and in different populations (children or adults).

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist undertook a search of the following databases: MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 30 April 2020); Embase Ovid (1980 to 30 April 2020); US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov, to 30 April 2020); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 30 April 2020). We studied reference lists as well as published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy study designs that compared a visual classification system (index test) with a reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs). This included cross-sectional studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of single index tests and studies that directly compared two or more index tests. Studies reporting at both the patient or tooth surface level were included. In vitro and in vivo studies were considered. Studies that explicitly recruited participants with caries into dentine or frank cavitation were excluded. We also excluded studies that artificially created carious lesions and those that used an index test during the excavation of dental caries to ascertain the optimum depth of excavation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently and in duplicate using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form based on QUADAS-2 specific to the review context. Estimates of diagnostic accuracy were determined using the bivariate hierarchical method to produce summary points of sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and regions, and 95% prediction regions. The comparative accuracy of different classification systems was conducted based on indirect comparisons. Potential sources of heterogeneity were pre-specified and explored visually and more formally through meta-regression.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 71 datasets from 67 studies (48 completed in vitro) reporting a total of 19,590 tooth sites/surfaces. The most frequently reported classification systems were the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) (36 studies) and Ekstrand-Ricketts-Kidd (ERK) (15 studies). In reporting the results, no distinction was made between detection and diagnosis. Only two studies were at low risk of bias across all four domains, and 15 studies were at low concern for applicability across all three domains. The patient selection domain had the highest proportion of high risk of bias studies (49 studies). Four studies were assessed at high risk of bias for the index test domain, nine for the reference standard domain, and seven for the flow and timing domain. Due to the high number of studies on extracted teeth concerns regarding applicability were high for the patient selection and index test domains (49 and 46 studies respectively). Studies were synthesised using a hierarchical bivariate method for meta-analysis. There was substantial variability in the results of the individual studies: sensitivities ranged from 0.16 to 1.00 and specificities from 0 to 1.00. For all visual classification systems the estimated summary sensitivity and specificity point was 0.86 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.90) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.82) respectively, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 20.38 (95% CI 14.33 to 28.98). In a cohort of 1000 tooth surfaces with 28% prevalence of enamel caries, this would result in 40 being classified as disease free when enamel caries was truly present (false negatives), and 163 being classified as diseased in the absence of enamel caries (false positives). The addition of test type to the model did not result in any meaningful difference to the sensitivity or specificity estimates (Chi²(4) = 3.78, P = 0.44), nor did the addition of primary or permanent dentition (Chi²(2) = 0.90, P = 0.64). The variability of results could not be explained by tooth surface (occlusal or approximal), prevalence of dentinal caries in the sample, nor reference standard. Only one study intentionally included restored teeth in its sample and no studies reported the inclusion of sealants. We rated the certainty of the evidence as low, and 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 in vitro studies, and inconsistency of results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Whilst the confidence intervals for the summary points of the different visual classification systems indicated reasonable performance, they do not reflect the confidence that one can have in the accuracy of assessment using these systems due to the considerable unexplained heterogeneity evident across the studies. The prediction regions in which the sensitivity and specificity of a future study should lie are very broad, an important consideration when interpreting the results of this review. Should treatment be provided as a consequence of a false-positive result then this would be non-invasive, typically the application of fluoride varnish where it was not required, with low potential for an adverse event but healthcare resource and finance costs. Despite the robust methodology applied in this comprehensive review, the results should be interpreted with some caution due to shortcomings in the design and execution of many of the included studies. Studies to determine the diagnostic accuracy of methods to detect and diagnose caries in situ are particularly challenging. Wherever possible future studies should be carried out in a clinical setting, to provide a realistic assessment of performance within the oral cavity with the challenges of plaque, tooth staining, and restorations, and consider methods to minimise bias arising from the use of imperfect reference standards in clinical studies.

Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries

BACKGROUND

The detection and diagnosis of caries at the earliest opportunity is fundamental to the preservation of tooth tissue and maintenance of oral health. Radiographs have traditionally been used to supplement the conventional visual-tactile clinical examination. Accurate, timely detection and diagnosis of early signs of disease could afford patients the opportunity of less invasive treatment with less destruction of tooth tissue, reduce the need for treatment with aerosol-generating procedures, and potentially result in a reduced cost of care to the patient and to healthcare services.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of different dental imaging methods to inform the detection and diagnosis of non-cavitated enamel only coronal dental caries.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist undertook a search of the following databases: MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 31 December 2018); Embase Ovid (1980 to 31 December 2018); US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov, to 31 December 2018); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 31 December 2018). We studied reference lists as well as published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy study designs that compared a dental imaging method with a reference standard (histology, excavation, enhanced visual examination), studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of single index tests, and studies that directly compared two or more index tests. Studies reporting at both the patient or tooth surface level were included. In vitro and in vivo studies were eligible for inclusion. Studies that explicitly recruited participants with more advanced lesions that were obviously into dentine or frankly cavitated were excluded. We also excluded studies that artificially created carious lesions and those that used an index test during the excavation of dental caries to ascertain the optimum depth of excavation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently and in duplicate using a standardised data extraction form and quality assessment based on QUADAS-2 specific to the clinical context. Estimates of diagnostic accuracy were determined using the bivariate hierarchical method to produce summary points of sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence regions. Comparative accuracy of different radiograph methods was conducted based on indirect and direct comparisons between methods. Potential sources of heterogeneity were pre-specified and explored visually and more formally through meta-regression.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 104 datasets from 77 studies reporting a total of 15,518 tooth sites or surfaces. The most frequently reported imaging methods were analogue radiographs (55 datasets from 51 studies) and digital radiographs (42 datasets from 40 studies) followed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (7 datasets from 7 studies). Only 17 studies were of an in vivo study design, carried out in a clinical setting. No studies were considered to be at low risk of bias across all four domains but 16 studies were judged to have low concern for applicability across all domains. The patient selection domain had the largest number of studies judged to be at high risk of bias (43 studies); the index test, reference standard, and flow and timing domains were judged to be at high risk of bias in 30, 12, and 7 studies respectively. Studies were synthesised using a hierarchical bivariate method for meta-analysis. There was substantial variability in the results of the individual studies, with sensitivities that ranged from 0 to 0.96 and specificities from 0 to 1.00. For all imaging methods the estimated summary sensitivity and specificity point was 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.53) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.92), respectively. In a cohort of 1000 tooth surfaces with a prevalence of enamel caries of 63%, this would result in 337 tooth surfaces being classified as disease free when enamel caries was truly present (false negatives), and 43 tooth surfaces being classified as diseased in the absence of enamel caries (false positives). Meta-regression indicated that measures of accuracy differed according to the imaging method (Chi²(4) = 32.44, P < 0.001), with the highest sensitivity observed for CBCT, and the highest specificity observed for analogue radiographs. None of the specified potential sources of heterogeneity were able to explain the variability in results. No studies included restored teeth in their sample or reported the inclusion of sealants. We rated the certainty of the evidence as low for sensitivity and specificity and 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 in vitro studies, and the observed inconsistency of the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The design and conduct of studies to determine the diagnostic accuracy of methods to detect and diagnose caries in situ are particularly challenging. Low-certainty evidence suggests that imaging for the detection or diagnosis of early caries may have poor sensitivity but acceptable specificity, resulting in a relatively high number of false-negative results with the potential for early disease to progress. If left untreated, the opportunity to provide professional or self-care practices to arrest or reverse early caries lesions will be missed. The specificity of lesion detection is however relatively high, and one could argue that initiation of non-invasive management (such as the use of topical fluoride), is probably of low risk. CBCT showed superior sensitivity to analogue or digital radiographs but has very limited applicability to the general dental practitioner. However, given the high-radiation dose, and potential for caries-like artefacts from existing restorations, its use cannot be justified in routine caries detection. Nonetheless, if early incidental carious lesions are detected in CBCT scans taken for other purposes, these should be reported. CBCT has the potential to be used as a reference standard in diagnostic studies of this type. Despite the robust methodology applied in this comprehensive review, the results should be interpreted with some caution due to shortcomings in the design and execution of many of the included studies. Future research should evaluate the comparative accuracy of different methods, be undertaken in a clinical setting, and focus on minimising bias arising from the use of imperfect reference standards in clinical studies.

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.

Comparative in vitro validation of VistaProof and DIAGNOdent pen for occlusal caries detection in permanent teeth

PURPOSE

Current caries diagnostic tools are neither very accurate nor very reliable for the detection of carious lesions of different depths. Thus, the development of new devices and techniques is needed. The aim of this in vitro study was to validate a newer fluorescence device VistaProof (VP), and compare it with DIAGNOdent Pen (DP), direct visual (DV) and indirect visual methods (IDV), with respect to accuracy and reliability for the detection of occlusal caries in permanent teeth.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred seven sites on 41 occlusal surfaces of recently extracted premolars were selected and classified into lesion categories according to Ekstrand's clinical criteria, by direct and indirect visual examination. The fluorescence of the sites was also measured by the two devices, and the teeth were ground through the sites for histological evaluation of their lesion depth. One calibrated examiner of high reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]>0.85) made all of the evaluations. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of each detection method were estimated based on histological examination as the reference method, estimated using cutoff limits calculated on the basis of best agreement between the devices' values and histological examination. McNemar tests and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were used to compare the validity measures of all detection methods at α=0.05, while the ICC was used to test the reproducibility of the methods based on a second measurement one week after the first.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) between the accuracy of DP and VPs for both enamel and dentin lesions. The areas under the ROC curves (AUC) for the two devices were also found not to be different (p>0.05). The reliability of DP was statistically significantly better than VP (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The validity of both fluorescence devices were not found to be significantly different and not better than visual methods for the detection of noncavitated carious lesions.

An examination of the advances in science and technology of prevention of tooth decay in young children since the Surgeon General's Report on Oral Health

This paper addresses a number of areas related to how effectively science and technology have met Healthy People 2010 goals for tooth decay prevention. In every area mentioned, it appears that science and technology are falling short of these goals. Earlier assessments identified water fluoridation as one of the greatest public health accomplishments of the last century. Yet, failure to complete needed clinical and translational research has shortchanged the caries prevention agenda at a critical juncture. Science has firmly established the transmissible nature of tooth decay. However, there is evidence that tooth decay in young children is increasing, although progress has been made in other age groups. Studies of risk assessment have not been translated into improved practice. Antiseptics, chlorhexidine varnish, and polyvinylpyrrolidone iodine (PVI-I) may have value, but definitive trials are needed. Fluorides remain the most effective agents, but are not widely disseminated to the most needy. Fluoride varnish provides a relatively effective topical preventive for very young children, yet definitive trials have not been conducted. Silver diamine fluoride also has potential but requires study in the United States. Data support effectiveness and safety of xylitol, but adoption is not widespread. Dental sealants remain a mainstay of public policy, yet after decades of research, widespread use has not occurred. We conclude that research has established the public health burden of tooth decay, but insufficient research addresses the problems identified in the report Oral Health in America: A Report of the Surgeon General. Transfer of technology from studies to implementation is needed to prevent tooth decay among children. This should involve translational research and implementation of scientific and technological advances into practice.

Clinical diagnosis of fissure caries with conventional and laser-induced fluorescence techniques

We studied the in vivo validity of dentinal fissure caries diagnosis by visual examination, bitewing radiography, and use of a laser-induced fluorescence device (DIAGNOdent). A total of 144 and second molars with macroscopically intact occlusal surfaces in 41 Chinese young adults were examined visually, by bitewing radiography, and by DIAGNOdent. Visual examination after pit and fissure opening was used as the reference standard. The sensitivity and specificity of detecting caries that had extended into the dentin were, respectively, 0.89 and 0.44 by visual detection of opacity or discoloration after air drying, 0.13 and 1.00 by bitewing radiography to detect radiolucency extending into the dentin, and 0.70 and 0.84 by DIAGNOdent testing with a cut-off score of 40. Caries detection by a combination of visual examination and DIAGNOdent had a sensitivity of 0.67 and specificity of 0.94. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that this combined approach was superior to the other methods.