Volume 2, Issue 4 (10-2017)
J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2017, 2(4): 44-49 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mehralizadeh S, Nemati Anaraki S, Orshesh M. Comparison of CMOS and PSP intraoral digital sensors in the diagnosis of secondary caries adjacent to amalgam restorations. J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2017; 2 (4) :44-49
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-180-en.html
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-180-en.html
1- Assistant professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, , sandramehr@yahoo.com
2- Assistant professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry,
3- Dentist
2- Assistant professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry,
3- Dentist
Abstract: (4651 Views)
Background and Aim: Considering the consequences of false positive (FP) and false negative (FN) diagnoses as well as the lack of information on the diagnostic ability of photostimulable phosphor plate (PSP) and complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) sensors in the detection of secondary caries, this study aimed to compare the diagnostic ability of these two sensors in the detection of secondary caries adjacent to amalgam restorations.
Materials and Methods: This diagnostic study was performed on 40 intact permanent premolars. Class II cavities were prepared and restored with amalgam. Periapical radiography was performed by using PSP and CMOS sensors via parallel technique. A 0.5-mm round bur was used to create another cavity under amalgam restorations. To simulate secondary gingival caries at the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), the samples were placed inside 0.1M lactic acid solution and were incubated at 37°C for three weeks. The teeth were placed in gypsum blocks and were radiographed again by CMOS and PSP sensors. The presence of decay was determined by an oral and maxillofacial radiologist, and the results were recorded in datasheets and were statistically analyzed by the ratio test.
Results: The sensitivity and specificity of PSP in caries detection were 52.5% and 77.5%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of CMOS in caries detection were 57.5% and 82.5%, respectively. Incorrect diagnoses (FP+FN) were equal to 35% for PSP and 30% for CMOS (P=0.89).
Conclusion: The results indicated that PSP and CMOS sensors have similar abilities in the detection of secondary caries under amalgam restorations, while none of the two sensors has the adequate ability for a precise and thorough diagnosis of secondary caries.
Materials and Methods: This diagnostic study was performed on 40 intact permanent premolars. Class II cavities were prepared and restored with amalgam. Periapical radiography was performed by using PSP and CMOS sensors via parallel technique. A 0.5-mm round bur was used to create another cavity under amalgam restorations. To simulate secondary gingival caries at the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), the samples were placed inside 0.1M lactic acid solution and were incubated at 37°C for three weeks. The teeth were placed in gypsum blocks and were radiographed again by CMOS and PSP sensors. The presence of decay was determined by an oral and maxillofacial radiologist, and the results were recorded in datasheets and were statistically analyzed by the ratio test.
Results: The sensitivity and specificity of PSP in caries detection were 52.5% and 77.5%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of CMOS in caries detection were 57.5% and 82.5%, respectively. Incorrect diagnoses (FP+FN) were equal to 35% for PSP and 30% for CMOS (P=0.89).
Conclusion: The results indicated that PSP and CMOS sensors have similar abilities in the detection of secondary caries under amalgam restorations, while none of the two sensors has the adequate ability for a precise and thorough diagnosis of secondary caries.
Type of Study: Original article |
Subject:
Radiology
References
1. Mjör IA , Toffenetti F:secondary caries,a literatures review with case reports. Quintessence Int. 2000 Mar;31(3):165-79.
2. Jokstad A. Secondary caries and microleakage. Dent Mater. 2016 Jan;32(1):11-25.
3. Okida RC, Mandarino F, Sundfeld RH, de Alexandre RS, Sundefeld ML. In vitro evaluation of secondary caries formation around restoration. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 2008 Aug;49(3):121-8.
4. Jaberi Ansari Z, Valizadeh Haghi H. Secondary Caries in the Posterior Teeth of Patients Presenting to the Department of Operative Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti Dental School. J Dent Sch. 2014;32(3):125-31.
5. Fracaro MS, Seow WK, McAllan LH, Purdie DM. The sensitivity and specificity of clinical assessment compared with bitewing radiography for detection of occlusal dentin caries. Pediatr Dent. 2001 May-Jun;23(3):204-10.
6. Brouwer F, Askar H, Paris S, Schwendicke F. Detecting Secondary Caries Lesions. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis J Dent Res. 2016 Feb;95(2):143-51.
7. Anas A, Asaad J, Tarboush K. A Comparison of intra-oral digital imaging modalities. Charged Couple Device versus Storage Phosphor Plate. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2010 Nov;4(2):156–67.
8. Williams CP. Digital radiography sensors: CCD, CMOS, and PSP. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2001 Jun-Jul;13(5):395-6.
9. Syriopoulos K , Sanderink GC, Velders XL, van der Stelt PF.Radiographic detection of approximal caries: a comparison of dental films and digital imaging systems.Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000 Sep;29(5):312-8.
10. Castro VM , Katz JO, Hardman PK, Glaros AG, Spencer P. In vitro comparison of conventional film and direct digital imaging in the detection of approximal caries.Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007 Mar;36(3):138-42.
11. Ilgüy M , Dinçer S, Ilgüy D, Bayirli G.Detection of artificial occlusal caries in a phosphor imaging plate system with two types of LCD monitors versus three different films.J Digit Imaging. 2009 Jun;22(3):242-9.
12. Murat S, Kamburoğlu K, Isayev A, Kurşun S, Yüksel S. Visibility of artificial buccal recurrent caries under restorations using different radiographic techniques.Oper Dent 2013 Mar-Apr;38(2):197-207.
13. Nair MK , Ludlow JB, May KN, Nair UP, Johnson MP, Close JM.Diagnostic accuracy of intraoral film and direct digital images for detection of simulated recurrent decay.Oper Dent. 2001 May-Jun;26(3):223-30.
14. de Araujo EA , Castilho JC, Medici Filho E, de Moraes ME.Comparison of direct digital and conventional imaging with Ekta Speed Plus and INSIGHT films for the detection of approximal caries.Am J Dent. 2005 Aug;18(4):241-4.
15. Künzel A, Scherkowski D, Willers R, Becker J. Visually detectable resolution of intraoral dental films. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2003 Nov;32(6):385-9.
16. Møystad A, Svanaes DB, Risnes S, Larheim TA, Gröndahl HG. Detection of approximal caries with a storage phosphor system. A comparison of enhanced digital images with dental X-ray film. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1996 Sep;25(4):202-6.
17. Pedrosa RF, Brasileiro IV, dos Anjos Pontual ML, dos Anjos Pontual A, da Silveira MM. Influence of materials radiopacity in the radiographic diagnosis of secondary caries: evaluation in film and two digital systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011 Sep;40(6):344-50.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
