对非空泡性龋齿检测方法的有效性和可靠性进行了综述。

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Saranya Murukutla, Amid Ismail
{"title":"对非空泡性龋齿检测方法的有效性和可靠性进行了综述。","authors":"Saranya Murukutla, Amid Ismail","doi":"10.1159/cre/abuag012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dental caries is the most prevalent chronic disease that affects people of all ages. Early detection of dental caries is crucial to prevent irreversible dental tissue damage, infection, and tooth loss, yet traditional detection methods face challenges in reliably identifying non-cavitated lesions. The review aimed to determine the validity and reliability of epidemiological and clinical diagnostic methods used to detect non-cavitated caries.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Twenty in vivo studies from 1997 to 2025 were analyzed, focusing on clinical-visual examination, radiographs, tactile examination, and fiber-optic transillumination (FOTI), along with new adjunctive technologies, such as LumiCare, CALCIVIS, and BlueCheck. Diagnostic validity among the studies was assessed using reference standards, including histological validation, operative intervention involving fissure opening, and, in some studies, clinical-visual examination. Of the 20 included studies, 18 evaluated conventional diagnostic methods, with only two assessing tactile examination, and one evaluating FOTI. Only one study evaluated newer adjunctive technologies, including LumiCare and CALCIVIS. Visual examination with International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) showed high sensitivity for enamel caries (up to 98%), while radiographs demonstrated greater specificity, particularly for dentinal lesions. Approximal detection with either visual or radiograph examinations showed variable sensitivity but consistently high specificity. Visual methods demonstrated moderate-to-high reliability (≥0.85), whereas radiographic reliability varied widely (0.08-1.00). Evidence for FOTI and tactile examination was limited, and the validity of FOTI remains underexplored. Despite limited available evidence, LumiCare and CALCIVIS reported high sensitivity (91-92%) and specificity (98-100%) for early caries detection.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>Overall, detailed visual examination demonstrated higher sensitivity, while radiographs offer greater specificity, highlighting the need for combined diagnostic approaches based on lesion type and location. Evidence for LumiCare and CALCIVIS is limited, with a need for further clinical validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9620,"journal":{"name":"Caries Research","volume":" ","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Critical Review of the Validity and Reliability of Caries Detection Methods for Non-Cavitated Lesions.\",\"authors\":\"Saranya Murukutla, Amid Ismail\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/cre/abuag012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dental caries is the most prevalent chronic disease that affects people of all ages. Early detection of dental caries is crucial to prevent irreversible dental tissue damage, infection, and tooth loss, yet traditional detection methods face challenges in reliably identifying non-cavitated lesions. The review aimed to determine the validity and reliability of epidemiological and clinical diagnostic methods used to detect non-cavitated caries.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Twenty in vivo studies from 1997 to 2025 were analyzed, focusing on clinical-visual examination, radiographs, tactile examination, and fiber-optic transillumination (FOTI), along with new adjunctive technologies, such as LumiCare, CALCIVIS, and BlueCheck. Diagnostic validity among the studies was assessed using reference standards, including histological validation, operative intervention involving fissure opening, and, in some studies, clinical-visual examination. Of the 20 included studies, 18 evaluated conventional diagnostic methods, with only two assessing tactile examination, and one evaluating FOTI. Only one study evaluated newer adjunctive technologies, including LumiCare and CALCIVIS. Visual examination with International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) showed high sensitivity for enamel caries (up to 98%), while radiographs demonstrated greater specificity, particularly for dentinal lesions. Approximal detection with either visual or radiograph examinations showed variable sensitivity but consistently high specificity. Visual methods demonstrated moderate-to-high reliability (≥0.85), whereas radiographic reliability varied widely (0.08-1.00). Evidence for FOTI and tactile examination was limited, and the validity of FOTI remains underexplored. Despite limited available evidence, LumiCare and CALCIVIS reported high sensitivity (91-92%) and specificity (98-100%) for early caries detection.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>Overall, detailed visual examination demonstrated higher sensitivity, while radiographs offer greater specificity, highlighting the need for combined diagnostic approaches based on lesion type and location. Evidence for LumiCare and CALCIVIS is limited, with a need for further clinical validation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Caries Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Caries Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/cre/abuag012\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Caries Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/cre/abuag012","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

摘要

目的:龋齿是影响所有年龄段人群的最普遍的慢性疾病。早期发现龋齿对于防止不可逆的牙组织损伤、感染和牙齿脱落至关重要,但传统的检测方法在可靠地识别非空化病变方面面临挑战。本综述旨在确定用于检测非空腔性龋的流行病学和临床诊断方法的有效性和可靠性。方法:对1997年至2025年的20项体内研究进行分析,重点关注临床视觉检查、x线片、触觉检查和光纤透射(FOTI),以及新的辅助技术,如LumiCare、CALCIVIS和BlueCheck。这些研究的诊断有效性采用参考标准进行评估,包括组织学验证、裂隙打开的手术干预,在一些研究中,还包括临床视觉检查。结果:在纳入的20项研究中,18项评估了传统的诊断方法,只有2项评估了触觉检查,1项评估了FOTI。只有一项研究评估了较新的辅助技术,包括LumiCare和CALCIVIS。国际龋齿检测和评估系统(ICDAS)的目视检查显示对牙釉质龋齿具有很高的敏感性(高达98%),而x线片显示出更高的特异性,特别是对牙本质病变。通过视觉或x线检查的近似检测显示出不同的灵敏度,但始终具有高特异性。目测方法显示出中至高的可靠性(≥0.85),而x线摄影的可靠性差异很大(0.08-1.00)。FOTI和触觉检查的证据有限,FOTI的有效性仍未得到充分探讨。尽管现有证据有限,但LumiCare和CALCIVIS在早期龋齿检测方面具有很高的灵敏度(91%-92%)和特异性(98%-100%)。结论:总体而言,详细的视觉检查显示出更高的灵敏度,而x线片提供了更高的特异性,强调了基于病变类型和位置的联合诊断方法的必要性。LumiCare和CALCIVIS的证据有限,需要进一步的临床验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Critical Review of the Validity and Reliability of Caries Detection Methods for Non-Cavitated Lesions.

Background: Dental caries is the most prevalent chronic disease that affects people of all ages. Early detection of dental caries is crucial to prevent irreversible dental tissue damage, infection, and tooth loss, yet traditional detection methods face challenges in reliably identifying non-cavitated lesions. The review aimed to determine the validity and reliability of epidemiological and clinical diagnostic methods used to detect non-cavitated caries.

Summary: Twenty in vivo studies from 1997 to 2025 were analyzed, focusing on clinical-visual examination, radiographs, tactile examination, and fiber-optic transillumination (FOTI), along with new adjunctive technologies, such as LumiCare, CALCIVIS, and BlueCheck. Diagnostic validity among the studies was assessed using reference standards, including histological validation, operative intervention involving fissure opening, and, in some studies, clinical-visual examination. Of the 20 included studies, 18 evaluated conventional diagnostic methods, with only two assessing tactile examination, and one evaluating FOTI. Only one study evaluated newer adjunctive technologies, including LumiCare and CALCIVIS. Visual examination with International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) showed high sensitivity for enamel caries (up to 98%), while radiographs demonstrated greater specificity, particularly for dentinal lesions. Approximal detection with either visual or radiograph examinations showed variable sensitivity but consistently high specificity. Visual methods demonstrated moderate-to-high reliability (≥0.85), whereas radiographic reliability varied widely (0.08-1.00). Evidence for FOTI and tactile examination was limited, and the validity of FOTI remains underexplored. Despite limited available evidence, LumiCare and CALCIVIS reported high sensitivity (91-92%) and specificity (98-100%) for early caries detection.

Key messages: Overall, detailed visual examination demonstrated higher sensitivity, while radiographs offer greater specificity, highlighting the need for combined diagnostic approaches based on lesion type and location. Evidence for LumiCare and CALCIVIS is limited, with a need for further clinical validation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Caries Research
Caries Research 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
34
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Caries Research'' publishes epidemiological, clinical and laboratory studies in dental caries, erosion and related dental diseases. Some studies build on the considerable advances already made in caries prevention, e.g. through fluoride application. Some aim to improve understanding of the increasingly important problem of dental erosion and the associated tooth wear process. Others monitor the changing pattern of caries in different populations, explore improved methods of diagnosis or evaluate methods of prevention or treatment. The broad coverage of current research has given the journal an international reputation as an indispensable source for both basic scientists and clinicians engaged in understanding, investigating and preventing dental disease.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书