대한소아치과학회지 (Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry)

  • 제48권4호
  • /
  • Pages.405-413
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1226-8496(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-3819(eISSN)
대한소아치과학회 (Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

펜-타입 QLF 장비의 임상적 유구치 인접면 우식 탐지 성능

Detecting of Proximal Caries in Primary Molars using Pen-type QLF Device

  • 조혜진 (서울대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김현태 (서울대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 송지수 (서울대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 신터전 (서울대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김정욱 (서울대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 장기택 (서울대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김영재 (서울대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실)
  • Cho, Hyejin (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Hyuntae (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Song, Ji-Soo (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Shin, Teo Jeon (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Jung-Wook (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Jang, Ki-Taeg (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Young-Jae (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • 투고 : 2021.05.30
  • 심사 : 2021.06.16
  • 발행 : 2021.11.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구의 목적은 펜-타입 quantitative light-induced fluorescence(QLF) 장비의 임상적 유구치 인접면 우식 탐지 성능을 평가하는 것이다. 이를 위해 형광 소실, 적색 자기형광 그리고 인접면 우식을 위해 간편화된 QLF 평가 기준(QS-proximal)이 사용되었으며 교익 방사선 영상과 비교, 평가되었다. 총 344개의 유구치 인접면이 분석되었으며 인접면 우식 병소는 시진과 방사선학적 검사 그리고 QLF 검진을 통하여 평가되었다. QLF 영상들을 이용하여 분석된 QLF 매개변수들과 QS-proximal을 방사선학적 평가와 비교하여 장비의 법랑질과 상아질 우식 탐지 능력에 대한 민감도, 특이도 그리고 area under receiver operating curve(AUROC)가 계산되었다. 두 QLF 매개변수 모두 준수한 상아질 우식 탐지 능력을 보였으며 AUROC은 △F = 0.794, △R = 0.750였다. QS-proximal(0.757 - 0.769)은 시진(0.653)보다 더 높은 AUROC을 나타내었다. 결론적으로 펜-타입 QLF 장비는 방사선학적 평가와 비교하여 임상적으로 적용 가능한 성능을 보였다.

The purpose of this in vivo study was to assess the clinical screening performance of a quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) device in detecting proximal caries in primary molars. Fluorescence loss, red autofluorescence and a simplified QLF score for proximal caries (QS-proximal) were evaluated for their validity in detecting proximal caries in primary molars compared to bitewing radiography. Three hundred and forty-four primary molar surfaces were included in the study. Carious lesions were scored according to lesion severity assessed by visual-tactile and radiographic examinations. The QLF images were analyzed for two quantitative parameters, fluorescence loss and red autofluorescence, as well as for QS-proximal. For both quantitative parameters and QS-proximal, the sensitivity, specificity and area under receiver operating curve (AUROC) were calculated as a function of the radiographic scoring index at enamel and dentin caries levels. Both quantitative parameters showed fair AUROC values for detecting dentine level caries (△F = 0.794, △R = 0.750). QS-proximal showed higher AUROC values (0.757 - 0.769) than that of visual-tactile scores (0.653) in detecting dentine level caries. The QLF device showed fair screening performance in detecting proximal caries in primary molars compared to bitewing radiography.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Gomez J, Zakian C, Pretty IA, et al. : In vitro performance of different methods in detecting occlusal caries lesions. J Dent, 41:180-186, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.11.003
  2. Arnold W, Gaengler P, Kalkutschke L : Three-dimensional reconstruction of approximal subsurface caries lesions in deciduous molars. Clin Oral Investig, 2:174-179, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s007840050066
  3. Mortimer K : The relationship of deciduous enamel structure to dental disease. Caries Res, 4:206-223, 1970. https://doi.org/10.1159/000259643
  4. Wilson P, Beynon A : Mineralization differences between human deciduous and permanent enamel measured by quantitative microradiography. Arch Oral Biol, 34:85-88, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(89)90130-1
  5. Rayner J, Southarn J : Pulp changes in deciduous teeth associated with deep carious dentine. J Dent, 7:39-42, 1979. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(79)90037-X
  6. Tickotsky N, Petel R, Araki R, Moskovitz M : Caries Progression Rate in Primary Teeth: A Retrospective Study. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 41:358-361, 2017. https://doi.org/10.17796/1053-4628-41.5.358
  7. Gimenez T, Piovesan C, Ricketts DN, et al. : Visual Inspection for Caries Detection: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis. J Dent Res, 94:895-904, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034515586763
  8. Newman B, Seow WK, Holcombe T, et al. : Clinical detection of caries in the primary dentition with and without bitewing radiography. Aust Dent J, 54:23-30, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2008.01084.x
  9. Affairs ADACoS : The use of dental radiographs: update and recommendations. J Am Dent Assoc, 137:1304-1312, 2006. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0393
  10. de Josselin de Jong E, Higham SM, van der Veen MH, et al. : Quantified light-induced fluorescence, review of a diagnostic tool in prevention of oral disease. J Appl Phys, 105, 2009.
  11. Park SW, Kim SK, Kim BI, et al. : Comparison of fluorescence parameters between three generations of QLF devices for detecting enamel caries in vitro and on smooth surfaces. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther, 25:142-147, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdpdt.2018.11.019
  12. Kim ES, Lee ES, Kim BI, et al. : A new screening method to detect proximal dental caries using fluorescence imaging. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther, 20:257-262, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdpdt.2017.10.009
  13. Gomez J, Tellez M, Ismail AI, et al. : Non-cavitated carious lesions detection methods: a systematic review. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 41:54-66, 2013.
  14. Ando M, van der Veen MH, Schemehorn BR, Stookey GK : Comparative study to quantify demineralized enamel in deciduous and permanent teeth using laser-and lightinduced fluorescence techniques. Caries Res, 35:464-470, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1159/000047491
  15. Bader JD, Shugars DA, Bonito AJ : A systematic review of the performance of methods for identifying carious lesions. J Public Health Dent, 62:201-213, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-7325.2002.tb03446.x
  16. Novaes TF, Matos R, Mendes FM, et al. : Influence of the discomfort reported by children on the performance of approximal caries detection methods. Caries Res, 44:465-471, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1159/000320266
  17. Jung EH, Lee ES, Kim BI, et al. : Development of a fluorescence-image scoring system for assessing noncavitated occlusal caries. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther, 21:36-42, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdpdt.2017.10.027
  18. Gomez GF, Eckert GJ, Zandona AF : Orange/red fluorescence of active caries by retrospective quantitative lightinduced fluorescence image analysis. Caries Res, 50:295-302, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1159/000441899
  19. Kim HE, Kim BI : Analysis of orange/red fluorescence for bacterial activity in initial carious lesions may provide accurate lesion activity assessment for caries progression. J Evid Based Dent Pract, 17:125-128, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebdp.2017.03.010
  20. Tan P, Evans R, Morgan M : Caries, bitewings, and treatment decisions. Aust Den J, 47:138-141, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2002.tb00317.x
  21. Bussaneli DG, Restrepo M, Cordeiro RC, et al. : Proximal caries lesion detection in primary teeth: does this justify the association of diagnostic methods? Lasers Med Sci, 30: 2239-2244, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-015-1798-2
  22. Wenzel A : Radiographic display of carious lesions and cavitation in approximal surfaces: advantages and drawbacks of conventional and advanced modalities. Acta Odontol Scand, 72:251-264, 2014. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2014.888757
  23. Souza LA, Cancio V, Tostes MA : Accuracy of pen-type laser fluorescence device and radiographic methods in detecting approximal carious lesions in primary teeth - an in vivo study. Int J Paediatr Dent, 28:472-480, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12399
  24. Chen J, Qin M, Ma W, Ge L : A clinical study of a laser fluorescence device for the detection of approximal caries in primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent, 22:132-138, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2011.01180.x
  25. Buchalla W, Lennon A, Van Der Veen M, Stookey G : Optimal camera and illumination angulations for detection of interproximal caries using quantitative light-induced fluorescence. Caries Res, 36:320-326, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1159/000065954
  26. Ko HY, Kang SM, Kim BI, et al. : Validation of quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital (QLF-D) for the detection of approximal caries in vitro. J Dent, 43:568-575, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.02.010
  27. Ando M, Schemehorn BR, Stookey GK, et al. : Influence of enamel thickness on quantification of mineral loss in enamel using laser-induced fluorescence. Caries Res, 37:24-28, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1159/000068229