International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 9 , ISSUE 4 ( October-December, 2016 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Evaluation of different Diagnostic Modalities for Diagnosis of Dental Caries: An in vivo Study

Iram Zaidi, Muhamad Nishad, Divya Tomar

Keywords : Caries detector dye (Kuraray), DIAGNOdent, Intraoral camera, Occlusal lesion, Visual examination

Citation Information : Zaidi I, Nishad M, Tomar D. Evaluation of different Diagnostic Modalities for Diagnosis of Dental Caries: An in vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016; 9 (4):320-325.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1385

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-04-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the efficacy of different diagnostic aids for diagnosis of dental caries and to compare the validity in terms of sensitivity and specificity of all four diagnostic modalities for diagnosis of caries. Materials and methods: Occlusal surfaces of 100 primary and permanent molars were examined using the four diagnostic systems (visual, intraoral camera, DIAGNOdent, and DIAGNOdent with dye). These results were compared with operative intervention gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each diagnostic system for both enamel and dentin caries. Interrater agreement was calculated for each diagnostic system using kappa statistics. Results: For both enamel and dentin caries, the highest sensitivity values were provided by DIAGNOdent (0.91 and 0.72) and lowest for visual examination on wet surface (0.60 and 0.50). For both enamel and dentin caries, the specificity was found to be highest for intraoral camera on dry surface and lowest for visual examination. The DIAGNOdent gave the highest value of interrater agreement (kappa), i.e., 0.816 as compared with 0.03 for visual examination. Conclusion: The study clearly demonstrated that DIAGNO-dent was the most accurate and valid system tested for the detection of occlusal caries. It has the advantage of quantifying the mineral content, helping to improve the diagnostic efficacy and treatment and accurate assessment of fissures where the visual examination alone is not adequate, thus complementing the traditional dental examination. How to cite this article: Zaidi I, Somani R, Jaidka S, Nishad M, Singh S, Tomar D. Evaluation of different Diagnostic Modalities for Diagnosis of Dental Caries: An in vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(4):320-325.

PDF Share
  1. Fanerjee A, Watson TF, Kidd EAM. Dentine caries excavation: a review of current clinical techniques. Br Dent J 2000 May;188(9):476-482.
  2. Willershausen B, Azrak B, Wilms S. Fear of dental treatment and its possible effects on oral health. Eur J Med Res 1999 Feb;4(2):72-77.
  3. White T, Degusta D, Richards G, Baker S. Brief Communication: Prehistoric dentistry in the American Southwest: a drilled canine from Sky Aerie, Colorado. Am J Phys Anthropol 1997 Jul;103(3):409-414.
  4. Habib CM, Kronman J, Goldman M. A chemical evaluation of collagen and hydroxyproline after treatment with GK-101 (N-chloroglycine). Pharmacol Ther Dent 1975;2(3-4):209-215.
  5. Erten H, Uçtasli MB, Akarslan ZZ, Uzun O, Baspinar E. The assessment of unaided visual examination, intraoral camera and operating microscope for the detection of occlusal caries lesions. Oper Dent 2005 Mar-Apr;30(2):190-194.
  6. Wenzel A, Verdonschot EH, Truin GJ, Konig KG. Accuracy of visual inspection, fiber-optic transillumination, and various radiographic image modalities for the detection of occlusal caries in extracted noncavitated teeth. J Dent Res 1992 Dec;71(12):1934-1937.
  7. Konig K, Hibst R, Meyer G, Flemming G, Schneckenburger H. Laser-induced autofluorescence of carious regions of human teeth and caries-involved bacteria. Proc SPIE 1993 Dec;2080:125-131.
  8. Hibst R, Paulus R. Caries detection by red excited fluorescence: investigations on fluorophores. Caries Res 1999;33:281-332.
  9. Lussi, R, Hibst R, Paulus R. DIAGNOdent: an optical method for caries detection. J Dent Res 2004;83(C):C80-C83.
  10. Fusiyama T. Two layers of carious dentin: diagnosis and treatment. Oper Dent 1979 Spring;4(2):63-70.
  11. Amira MF, Zoghbi E. Validity of a caries detector dye as a reliable diagnostic aid of carious dentine lesions. Cairo Dent J 1999;15(1):637-642.
  12. Ekstrand KR. Improving clinical visual detection – potential for caries clinical trials. J Dent Res 2004;83(C):C67-C71.
  13. Lussi A, Hack A, Hug I, Heckenberger H, Megert B, Stich H. Detection of approximal caries with a new laser fluorescence device. Caries Res 2006;40(2):97-103.
  14. Ekstrand KR, Zero DT, Martignon S, Pitts NB. Lesion activity assessment. Monogr Oral Sci 2009 Jun;21:63-90.
  15. Ismail AI, Hasson PH, Sohn W. Dental caries in the second millennium. J Dent Educ 2001 Oct;65(10):253-259.
  16. Zandoná AF, Zero DT. Diagnostic tool for early caries detection. J Am Dent Assoc 2006 Dec;137(12):1675-1684.
  17. Lussi A, Francescut P. Performance of conventional and new methods for detection of occlusal caries in deciduous teeth. Caries Res 2003 Jan-Feb;37(1):2-7.
  18. Attrill D, Ashley PF. Occlusal caries detection in primary teeth: a comparison of DIAGNOdent with conventional methods. Br Dent J 2001 Apr;190(8):440-443.
  19. Hamilton JC. Should a dental explorer be used to probe suspected carious lesions? J Am Dent Assoc 2005 Nov;136(11): 1526-1532.
  20. Pinheiro IVA, Medeiros MC, Ferreira MA, Lima KC. Use of laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent) for in vivo diagnosis of occlusal caries. J Minim Interv Dent 2004 Apr;1(1):48-51.
  21. Rodrigues JA, Diniz MB, Josgrilberg EB, Cordeiro RC. In vitro comparison of laser fluorescence performance with visual examination for detection of occlusal caries in permanent and primary molars. Las Med Sci 2009 Jul;24(4):501-506.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.