Reliability and discriminatory power of methods for dental plaque quantification

Raggio, Daniela Prócida; Braga, Mariana Minatel; Rodrigues, Jonas Almeida; Freitas, Patrícia Moreira de; Imparato, José Carlos Pettorossi; Mendes, Fausto Medeiros

doi:10.1590/s1678-77572010000200014

Cited by 23 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…3,6,7,9,11,12 The statistically significant difference observed between the groups after 14 days of plaque accumulation is understandable since the dental plaque exposed to sucrose is often formed faster. 22 However, since there was no significant demineralization in the control group, the red fluorescence of the dental plaque was not directly associated with its cariogenic activity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…2,7 Another use of these devices is the possibility of quantifying the red fluorescence of dental plaque in the oral environment. 6,[8][9][10] One of those devices is the quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF), which emits a blue light at 405 nm and collects the fluorescence at the green and red spectra. 7 With regard to the dental plaque, the researchers have first focused on the investigation of individual microorganisms responsible for the emission of the red fluorescence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is the red fluorescence of dental plaque related to its cariogenicity?

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. It has been speculated that the red fluorescence emitted by dental plaque could be related to its cariogenicity. To test this hypothesis, we designed this crossover in situ study, with two experimental phases of 14 days each. Seventeen volunteers, wearing a palatal appliance with bovine enamel blocks, were instructed to drip a 20% sucrose solution (experimental group) or purified water (control group) onto the enamel blocks eight times daily. The specimens were removed after 4, 7, 10, and 14 days, and the red fluorescence of dental plaque formed on the enamel blocks was assessed using a quantitative light-induced fluorescence device. After the plaque removal, surface and cross-sectional microhardness tests were performed to assess the mineral loss. The comparisons were made by a multilevel linear regression analysis. We observed a significant increase in the red fluorescence of the dental plaque after longer periods of formation, but this trend was verified in both groups. The mineral loss assessed by the microhardness techniques, contrariwise, showed a significant increase only in the experimental group. In conclusion, the red fluorescence emitted by the dental plaque indicates a mature biofilm, but this fact is not necessarily associated with its cariogenicity. © The Authors. Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the red fluorescence of dental plaque related to its cariogenicity?

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the first two collect data for the fluorescence of the lesion directly and in contact with the lesion, while the other two, being cameras, collect data indirectly from the fluorescence image map of the lesion. Several studies have reported on VistaProof, 11,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] and three of them compared it with DIAGNOdent. 11,22,23 Studies comparing QLF and DIAGNOdent devices are limited, [24][25][26] and no study has yet published results on a comparison of VistaProof and QLF.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative In Vitro Validation of VistaProof and DIAGNOdent Pen for Occlusal Caries Detection in Permanent Teeth

Seremidi¹,

Lagouvardos²,

Kavvadia³

2012

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laser/light fluorescence devices were highly reliable for occlusal caries diagnosis in permanent teeth but not superior in accuracy to visual methods. SUMMARYPurpose: Current caries diagnostic tools are neither very accurate nor very reliable for the detection of carious lesions of different depths. Thus, the development of new devices and techniques is needed. The aim of this in vitro study was to validate a newer fluorescence device, VistaProof (VP), and compare it with DIAGNOdent Pen (DP), direct visual (DV) and indirect visual methods (IDV), with respect to accuracy and reliability for the detection of occlusal caries in permanent teeth.Methods and Materials: One hundred seven sites on 41 occlusal surfaces of recently extracted premolars were selected and classified into lesion categories according to Ekstrand's clinical criteria, by direct and indirect visual examination. The fluorescence of the sites was also measured by the two devices, and the teeth were ground through the sites for histological evaluation of their lesion depth. One calibrated examiner of high reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC].0.85) made all of the evaluations. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of each detection method were estimated based on histological examination as the reference method, estimated using cutoff limits calculated on the basis of best agreement between the devices' values and histological examination. McNemar tests and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve , 2012, 37-3, 234-245 analyses were used to compare the validity measures of all detection methods at a=0.05, while the ICC was used to test the reproducibility of the methods based on a second measurement one week after the first.Results: There was no statistically significant difference (p.0.05) between the accuracy of DP and VPs for both enamel and dentin lesions. The areas under the ROC curves (AUC) for the two devices were also found not to be different (p.0.05). The reliability of DP was statistically significantly better than VP (p,0.05).Conclusion: The validity of both fluorescence devices were not found to be significantly different and not better than visual methods for the detection of noncavitated carious lesions.

show abstract

“…However, these values still need to be adjusted (Rodrigues et al, 2008. Recently, this device showed a good performance in detecting and quantifying dental plaque formed over smooth surfaces under high exposition to sucrose (Raggio et al, 2010). www.intechopen.com…”

Section: Fluorescence Camera (Vistaproof)mentioning

confidence: 99%