Clinical oral investigations · 2020
The OralChromaTM CHM-2: a comparison with the OralChromaTM CHM-1.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Laleman I, Dekeyser C, Wylleman A, Teughels W, Quirynen M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Already decades ago, the diagnosis of halitosis was facilitated with the arrival of chair-side instruments to score the breath odor. These devices are used for a more objective assessment of halitosis compared with organoleptic scoring, but these too have their disadvantages. To overcome some of the drawbacks of the original model of the OralChromaTM (CHM-1), few years ago a second generation of this machine (CHM-2) was introduced. This study compared both devices in a clinical setting.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All records of the patients visiting a specialized halitosis consultation over a period of 5 years (2012-2017) were examined. The correlations of the OralChromaTM CHM-1 and CHM-2 with the organoleptic and Halimeter® measurements were analyzed. Additionally the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predicted values were calculated.
RESULTS: A total of 581 data points were included (CHM-1: 292, CHM-2: 289). The correlations between both models with the organoleptic measurements were not statistically significant different. The CHM-2 seemed superior to the CHM-1 in the quantification of dimethyl sulfide with a detection rate of 95% and 61%, respectively. Additionally, the CHM-2 was significantly more sensitive for dimethyl sulfide than the CHM-1. However the latter showed in turn a better sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan.
CONCLUSION: The CHM-2 showed a better sensitivity for dimethyl sulfide than its predecessor. However, its sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan was worse.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dimethyl sulfide is the main volatile implicated in extra-oral blood-borne halitosis, this makes the OralChromaTM CHM-2 the instrument of choice when this is suspected.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All records of the patients visiting a specialized halitosis consultation over a period of 5 years (2012-2017) were examined. The correlations of the OralChromaTM CHM-1 and CHM-2 with the organoleptic and Halimeter® measurements were analyzed. Additionally the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predicted values were calculated.
RESULTS: A total of 581 data points were included (CHM-1: 292, CHM-2: 289). The correlations between both models with the organoleptic measurements were not statistically significant different. The CHM-2 seemed superior to the CHM-1 in the quantification of dimethyl sulfide with a detection rate of 95% and 61%, respectively. Additionally, the CHM-2 was significantly more sensitive for dimethyl sulfide than the CHM-1. However the latter showed in turn a better sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan.
CONCLUSION: The CHM-2 showed a better sensitivity for dimethyl sulfide than its predecessor. However, its sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan was worse.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dimethyl sulfide is the main volatile implicated in extra-oral blood-borne halitosis, this makes the OralChromaTM CHM-2 the instrument of choice when this is suspected.