Detection of proximal caries using quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital and laser fluorescence: a comparative study

Hyung In Yoon, Min Jeong Yoo, Eun Jin Park

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the in vitro validity of quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital (QLF-D) and laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent) for assessing proximal caries in extracted premolars, using digital radiography as reference method. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 102 extracted premolars with similar lengths and shapes were used. A single operator conducted all the examinations using three different detection methods (bitewing radiography, QLF-D, and DIAGNOdent). The bitewing x-ray scale, QLF-D fluorescence loss (ΔF), and DIAGNOdent peak readings were compared and statistically analyzed. RESULTS. Each method showed an excellent reliability. The correlation coefficient between bitewing radiography and QLF-D, DIAGNOdent were -0.644 and 0.448, respectively, while the value between QLF-D and DIAGNOdent was -0.382. The kappa statistics for bitewing radiography and QLF-D had a higher diagnosis consensus than those for bitewing radiography and DIAGNOdent. The QLF-D was moderately to highly accurate (AUC = 0.753 - 0.908), while DIAGNOdent was moderately to less accurate (AUC = 0.622 - 0.784). All detection methods showed statistically significant correlation and high correlation between the bitewing radiography and QLF-D. CONCLUSION. QLF-D was found to be a valid and reliable alternative diagnostic method to digital bitewing radiography for in vitro detection of proximal caries.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)432-438
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Advanced Prosthodontics
Volume9
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Dec 2017

Keywords

  • Bitewing radiography
  • Laser fluorescence
  • Proximal caries detection
  • Quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Detection of proximal caries using quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital and laser fluorescence: a comparative study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this