Journal of dentistry · 2024
Tactile sensation in relation to roughness and reflection of active initial lesions in primary (deciduous) and permanent dentition in vitro.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Wierichs R J, Werren T T, Jaruszewski L, Meyer-Lueckel H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated whether a relationship exist between tactile sensation, roughness and reflection intensity in active enamel lesions of primary (deciduous) and permanent dentition.
METHODS: Freshly extracted teeth of the primary (n=29) and permanent (n=60) dentition of patients who underwent serial extractions under general anesthesia due to multiple deep caries lesions showing active lesions (International Caries Detection and Assessment System scores of 2) were selected. The mean linear (Ra), area-related (Sa), volume-related (Vmc) roughness and vertical reflection intensity (VRI) of sound (S) and carious (C) areas were determined by using a 3D-laser-scanning-microscope and a multi-sensor microscope with two different chromatic-confocal optics. Furthermore, two blinded examiners evaluated the roughness by tactile examination using three different explorers (S23H,405CP11, S3C).
RESULTS: Mean differences (95%CI) between S and C for teeth of the primary dentition were: Ra:-1.9(-2.3;-0.4)µm, Sa:-31.8(-1.8;0.0)µm, Vmc:-1.8(-1.6;-0.0)ml/m2, VRI:29(20;43) and for teeth of the permanent dentition: Ra:-4.0(-2.5;-1.0)µm, Sa:-4.8(-3.0;-1.1)µm, Vmc:-4.6(-3.4;-0.5)ml/m2, VRI:34(19;44) differing significantly between S and C (p<0.05,Wilcoxon test). No significant difference was observed between 1st and 2nd dentition (p>0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test) as well as commercial and experimental optic (p>0.05). The highest positive predictive value (PPV) was achieved by examiner 1 with explorer S3C (1st dentition 67%;2nd dentition 100%;pooled dentition 88%)), while examiner 2 revealed the highest PPV with explorer S23H (89%;86%;88%).
CONCLUSION: Differences in roughness and reflectance between sound and caries-active enamel surfaces could be evaluated in both primary and permanent dentition. These differences could also be reliably detected using three different explorers with good validity. However, the most predictive explorer seems to differ between examiners.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In both primary (deciduous) and permanent dentition active caries lesions exhibit significantly higher roughness and lower vertical reflection intensity compared with sound enamel. These differences are detectable by blind tactile examination and objective methods such as 3D-laser-scanning or multi-sensor microscopy, highlighting their utility in caries diagnosis in both dentitions.
METHODS: Freshly extracted teeth of the primary (n=29) and permanent (n=60) dentition of patients who underwent serial extractions under general anesthesia due to multiple deep caries lesions showing active lesions (International Caries Detection and Assessment System scores of 2) were selected. The mean linear (Ra), area-related (Sa), volume-related (Vmc) roughness and vertical reflection intensity (VRI) of sound (S) and carious (C) areas were determined by using a 3D-laser-scanning-microscope and a multi-sensor microscope with two different chromatic-confocal optics. Furthermore, two blinded examiners evaluated the roughness by tactile examination using three different explorers (S23H,405CP11, S3C).
RESULTS: Mean differences (95%CI) between S and C for teeth of the primary dentition were: Ra:-1.9(-2.3;-0.4)µm, Sa:-31.8(-1.8;0.0)µm, Vmc:-1.8(-1.6;-0.0)ml/m2, VRI:29(20;43) and for teeth of the permanent dentition: Ra:-4.0(-2.5;-1.0)µm, Sa:-4.8(-3.0;-1.1)µm, Vmc:-4.6(-3.4;-0.5)ml/m2, VRI:34(19;44) differing significantly between S and C (p<0.05,Wilcoxon test). No significant difference was observed between 1st and 2nd dentition (p>0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test) as well as commercial and experimental optic (p>0.05). The highest positive predictive value (PPV) was achieved by examiner 1 with explorer S3C (1st dentition 67%;2nd dentition 100%;pooled dentition 88%)), while examiner 2 revealed the highest PPV with explorer S23H (89%;86%;88%).
CONCLUSION: Differences in roughness and reflectance between sound and caries-active enamel surfaces could be evaluated in both primary and permanent dentition. These differences could also be reliably detected using three different explorers with good validity. However, the most predictive explorer seems to differ between examiners.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In both primary (deciduous) and permanent dentition active caries lesions exhibit significantly higher roughness and lower vertical reflection intensity compared with sound enamel. These differences are detectable by blind tactile examination and objective methods such as 3D-laser-scanning or multi-sensor microscopy, highlighting their utility in caries diagnosis in both dentitions.