The influence of interdental spacing on the detection of proximal caries lesions in primary teeth

Near-infrared imaging in orthodontic intraoral scanners for early interproximal caries detection

INTRODUCTION

Intraoral scanners commonly used in orthodontic offices now offer near-infrared imaging (NIRI) technology, advertised as a screening tool to identify interproximal caries. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of NIRI detection of interproximal carious lesions in a common intraoral scanner (iTero Element 5D; Align Technology, San Jose, Calif) with and without bitewing radiograph complement, compared with a microcomputed tomography (micro-CT) reference standard.

METHODS

Extracted human posterior teeth (premolars and molars) were selected for early (noncavitated) interproximal carious lesions (n = 39) and sound control surfaces (n = 47). The teeth were scanned via micro-CT for evaluation by 2 blinded evaluators using consensus scoring. The teeth were mounted to simulate anatomic interproximal contacts and underwent a NIRI scan using iTero Element 5D and bitewing radiographs. Two trained, calibrated examiners independently evaluated (1) near-infrared images alone with clinical photograph, (2) bitewing radiograph alone with clinical photograph, and (3) near-infrared images with bitewing radiograph and clinical photograph in combination, after at least a 10-day washout period between each evaluation.

RESULTS

Interrater reliability was highest for NIRI alone (k = 0.533) compared with bitewing radiograph alone (k = 0.176) or in combination (k = 0.256). NIRI alone showed high specificity (0.83-0.96) and moderate sensitivity (0.42-0.63) compared with a micro-CT reference standard. Dentin lesions were significantly more reliably detected than enamel lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

After rigorous training and calibration, NIRI can be used with moderate reliability, high specificity, and moderate sensitivity to detect noncavitated interproximal carious lesions.

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.

Restoration of Proximal Contacts in Decayed Primary Molars Using Three Different Matrix Systems in Children Aged 5-9 Years: An In Vivo Study

Aims and objectives

Proximal contacts and their interdigitation through occlusal contact with opposing teeth play a major role in children, for the eruption of permanent teeth into normal position. Determining the ideal matrix band system for proximal restorations helps in the construction of contacts and contours. This study is designed to determine the most suitable matrix band system for proximal restorations.

Materials and methods

A total of 96 proximal cavities were selected among patients aged 5–9 years and were equally divided into three groups. Group I: T-band, group II: ProMatrix, and group III: FenderMate. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were taken to evaluate carious lesions and restorations. Class II cavity was prepared and glass ionomer restorations were done using matrix systems. The efficacy of matrix bands was evaluated through the operator's questionnaire and postoperative radiographs.

Results

No statistical significance was found between the three matrix bands but FenderMate showed few clinical drawbacks that were statistically significant (p < 0.005).

Interpretation and conclusion

Matrix systems used in this study showed good results in restoring proximal contacts and contours. FenderMate showed few drawbacks when compared with the other two matrix systems. None of the matrix systems used in the present study were able to create 100% accurate proximal contacts and contours.

How to cite this article

Dindukurthi MK, Setty JV, Srinivasan I, et al. Restoration of Proximal Contacts in Decayed Primary Molars Using Three Different Matrix Systems in Children Aged 5–9 Years: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(1):70–74.

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.

Accuracy of near-infrared light transillumination (NILT) compared to bitewing radiograph for detection of interproximal caries in the permanent dentition: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy of the near-infrared light transillumination (NILT) for the detection of interproximal dental caries in permanent dentition when compared to bitewing X-ray (BW).

DATA

In vivo studies that detected interproximal primary caries in permanent teeth by using NILT and BW were selected. QUADAS-2 was used to assess the risk of bias. Pooled sensitivity and specificity forest plots were calculated, summary receiver operator characteristics (SROC) curves were constructed. The certainty of the evidence was rated using the GRADE system.

SOURCES

Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Lilacs/BBO and grey literature databases were surveyed.

STUDY SELECTION

From 1594 retrieved articles, 13 studies were included. Six studies had a low risk of bias and a low level of concern regarding applicability. Four studies had an unclear risk of bias, while three presented a high risk of bias. The meta-analysis of six studies demonstrated that NILT presented good overall accuracy. Of 6110 teeth, 92.3 % (5639) were accurately classified (776 as true positive and 4863 as true negative). The pooled sensitivity was 0.97 (0.96 to 0.98; p = 0.0000; I² = 93.2 %) with moderate certainty of evidence, and the pooled specificity was 0.91 (0.91 to 0.92; p = 0.0000; I² = 98.3 %) with high certainty of evidence. Symmetric (0.9837) and asymmetric (0.9836) SROC showed a high discrimination and determination effect of NILT.

CONCLUSION

The current literature, with moderate certainty and a middling quality of evidence, demonstrates that NILT presents a reasonably comparable accuracy to that of BW for detecting interproximal carious lesions in the permanent dentition.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Since NILT presented good overall accuracy for the detection of interproximal primary caries, it could be routinely used in dental check-ups, especially in high-risk caries populations and in patients where the use of radiation should be reduced, like pregnant women or children.

A Colorimetric Interdental Probe as a Standard Method to Evaluate Interdental Efficiency of Interdental Brush

The aim of this study is to evaluate the concordance between the empirical choice of interdental brushes of different diameters compared to the gold standard, the IAP CURAPROX(©) calibrating colorimetric probe. It is carried out with the aim of facilitating the consensus development of best practices. All the subjects' interproximal spaces were evaluated using the reference technique (colorimetric probe), then after a time lapse of 1.2 ± 0.2 hours, using the empirical clinical technique (brushes) by the same examiner. Each examiner explored 3 subjects. The order the patients were examined with the colorimetric interdental probe (CIP) was random. 446 sites were selected in the study out of 468 potential sites. The correspondence of scores between interdental bushes vs. colorimetric probe is 43.0% [95%-CI: 38.5-47.6]. In 33.41% of the 446 sites, the brush is inferior to the probe; in 23.54% of cases, the brush is superior to the probe. Among the discrepancies there is thus a tendency for the subjects to use brushes with smaller diameter than that recommended by the colorimetric probe. This review has found very high-quality evidence that colorimetric probes plus interdental brushing is more beneficial than interdental brushing alone for increase the concordance between the empirical choice of interdental brushes of different diameters compared to the gold standard. Uncertainties remain and further research is required to provide detailed data on user satisfaction.

Influence of contact points on the performance of caries detection methods in approximal surfaces of primary molars: an in vivo study

This in vivo study aimed to evaluate the influence of contact points on the approximal caries detection in primary molars, by comparing the performance of the DIAGNOdent pen and visual-tactile examination after tooth separation to bitewing radiography (BW). A total of 112 children were examined and 33 children were selected. In three periods (a, b, and c), 209 approximal surfaces were examined: (a) examiner 1 performed visual-tactile examination using the Nyvad criteria (EX1); examiner 2 used DIAGNOdent pen (LF1) and took BW; (b) 1 week later, after tooth separation, examiner 1 performed the second visual-tactile examination (EX2) and examiner 2 used DIAGNOdent again (LF2); (c) after tooth exfoliation, surfaces were directly examined using DIAGNOdent (LF3). Teeth were examined by computed microtomography as a reference standard. Analyses were based on diagnostic thresholds: D1: D 0 = health, D 1 –D 4 = disease; D2: D 0 , D 1 = health, D 2 –D 4 = disease; D3: D 0 –D 2 = health, D 3 , D 4 = disease. At D1, the highest sensitivity/specificity were observed for EX1 (1.00)/LF3 (0.68), respectively. At D2, the highest sensitivity/ specificity were observed for LF3 (0.69)/BW (1.00), respectively. At D3, the highest sensitivity/specificity were observed for LF3 (0.78)/EX1, EX2 and BW (1.00). EX1 showed higher accuracy values than LF1, and EX2 showed similar values to LF2. We concluded that the visual-tactile examination showed better results in detecting sound surfaces and approximal caries lesions without tooth separation. However, the effectiveness of approximal caries lesion detection of both methods was increased by the absence of contact points. Therefore, regardless of the method of detection, orthodontic separating elastics should be used as a complementary tool for the diagnosis of approximal noncavitated lesions in primary molars.

A pilot study of a modified radiographic technique for detecting early proximal cavities

Diagnosing the necessity of cavity preparation in demineralized proximal areas has been considered as a challenge in restorative treatment planning. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical performance of a modified radiographic technique for the detection of proximal cavities. The sample consisted of 44 proximal surfaces in 38 dental students. The patients had radiolucent proximal lesions restricted to the inner half of enamel or the outer third of dentine in bitewing radiographs, and there was doubt regarding the presence or absence of cavities in the approximal areas. The suspected surfaces were then examined by secondary bitewing radiographs which were taken after pressing radiopaque material into the proximal areas. Finally, orthodontic elastic separators were placed in the contact areas to provide enough space for direct visual and tactile examination, thus detecting any proximal cavity (reference standard). The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the modified bitewing radiography were calculated against the reference standard. Overall, 7 surfaces presented caries cavities according to the reference standard. All proximal radiolucencies observed in the inner half of enamel and 46% of those extended to the outer third of dentine were not cavitated when evaluated by direct visual and tactile examination. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of bitewing radiography with opaque material for detecting proximal cavities (n = 7) were 86, 100 and 98%, respectively. The tested radiographic technique displayed good validity in this pilot study for detecting proximal cavities in posterior teeth and should be further investigated.