In vivo comparison of initial caries lesions using the enamel decalcification index and quantitative light-induced fluorescence measurement during orthodontic therapy.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Priscila Ferrari-Peron, Lisa M Steuer, Irene Schmidtmann, Ambili R Mundethu, David Canzler, Heinrich Wehrbein, Christina Erbe
{"title":"In vivo comparison of initial caries lesions using the enamel decalcification index and quantitative light-induced fluorescence measurement during orthodontic therapy.","authors":"Priscila Ferrari-Peron, Lisa M Steuer, Irene Schmidtmann, Ambili R Mundethu, David Canzler, Heinrich Wehrbein, Christina Erbe","doi":"10.1007/s00784-025-06234-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare two quantitative assessment methods - visual-tactile examination and fluorescence measurement - for detecting of initial caries lesions in adolescents undergoing treatment with a multibracket appliance (MB).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study included 28 subjects (14 males, 14 females), treated with MB in both the maxilla and mandible. Data collection occurred at three times points: prior to treatment (T0), six months after MB insertion (T1), and one year post-insertion (T2). The Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI; 0-3 scale) and quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) were employed for assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At T0, four subjects (14%) exhibited no lesions, while only two (7%) remained lesion-free at T1, and again at T2. The kappa coefficient for agreement between the two diagnostic methods across all time points was 0.71.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both the QLF and EDI methods yielded similar results, with only minor discrepancies. To determine the most appropriate method for each individual case, considerations of cost, benefit and time should be made.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>The similarity in outcomes for the QLF and EDI methods indicates that both diagnostic methods are effective and reliable. However, QLF may be prone to interference, which must be accounted for during its application.</p>","PeriodicalId":10461,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Investigations","volume":"29 3","pages":"174"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11893635/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-025-06234-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare two quantitative assessment methods - visual-tactile examination and fluorescence measurement - for detecting of initial caries lesions in adolescents undergoing treatment with a multibracket appliance (MB).

Materials and methods: This study included 28 subjects (14 males, 14 females), treated with MB in both the maxilla and mandible. Data collection occurred at three times points: prior to treatment (T0), six months after MB insertion (T1), and one year post-insertion (T2). The Enamel Decalcification Index (EDI; 0-3 scale) and quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) were employed for assessment.

Results: At T0, four subjects (14%) exhibited no lesions, while only two (7%) remained lesion-free at T1, and again at T2. The kappa coefficient for agreement between the two diagnostic methods across all time points was 0.71.

Conclusions: Both the QLF and EDI methods yielded similar results, with only minor discrepancies. To determine the most appropriate method for each individual case, considerations of cost, benefit and time should be made.

Clinical relevance: The similarity in outcomes for the QLF and EDI methods indicates that both diagnostic methods are effective and reliable. However, QLF may be prone to interference, which must be accounted for during its application.

正畸治疗中牙釉质脱钙指数与定量光致荧光测定初步龋损的体内比较。
目的:比较两种定量评估方法-视觉触觉检查和荧光测量-在青少年多支架矫治器(MB)治疗中检测初始龋损的效果。材料和方法:本研究纳入28例(男14例,女14例),均采用上、下颌骨MB治疗。数据收集发生在三个时间点:治疗前(T0)、MB植入后6个月(T1)和植入后1年(T2)。釉质脱钙指数(EDI);采用0-3分制)和定量光诱导荧光(QLF)进行评价。结果:在T0时,4名受试者(14%)没有出现病变,而只有2名(7%)在T1和T2时仍然没有病变。两种诊断方法在所有时间点上的一致性kappa系数为0.71。结论:QLF和EDI方法产生相似的结果,只有微小的差异。为确定最适合每个个案的方法,应考虑成本、效益和时间。临床相关性:QLF和EDI方法结果的相似性表明这两种诊断方法都是有效和可靠的。然而,QLF可能容易受到干扰,这在应用过程中必须加以考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Oral Investigations
Clinical Oral Investigations 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
484
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The journal Clinical Oral Investigations is a multidisciplinary, international forum for publication of research from all fields of oral medicine. The journal publishes original scientific articles and invited reviews which provide up-to-date results of basic and clinical studies in oral and maxillofacial science and medicine. The aim is to clarify the relevance of new results to modern practice, for an international readership. Coverage includes maxillofacial and oral surgery, prosthetics and restorative dentistry, operative dentistry, endodontics, periodontology, orthodontics, dental materials science, clinical trials, epidemiology, pedodontics, oral implant, preventive dentistiry, oral pathology, oral basic sciences and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信