|
KMID : 0362720180560010008
|
|
Journal of the Korean Dental Association
2018 Volume.56 No. 1 p.8 ~ p.16
|
|
|
Comparison of fluorescence loss measurements among various generations of QLF devices
|
|
Park Seok-Woo
Lee Hyung-Suk
Kim Sang-Kyeom
Lee Eun-Song
de Jong Elbert de Josselin
Kim Baek-Il
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Purpose: The aim of in vitro study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy to detect non-cavitated enamel caries on smooth surface by using four kinds of the QLF devices.
Materials and Methods: A total of 52 human permanent premolars and molars were used. Fluorescence images were captured by the QLF devices (Inspektor Pro, QLF-D, Qraycam, and Qraypen). Fluorescence loss of the QLF was calculated. The severity of lesions was categorized into the following 3 scores using polarized light microscopy: normal (S), enamel demineralization to outer half of enamel (D1), and inner half of the enamel up to the dentin-enamel junction (D2). The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the fluorescence loss among the QLF devices. Spearman rank correlation coefficient between histological scores and fluorescence loss of the devices was calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) were calculated to compare their diagnostic accuracies.
Results: The correlation coefficients between histological scores and the fluorescence loss of the devices showed 0.77 to 0.81 (P < 0.001). All histological scores, the fluorescence loss among the devices showed no statistical difference. Among the devices, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values of the fluorescence loss showed 0.84 to 0.94, 0.76 to 0.90, and 0.90 to 0.92, respectively.
Conclusions: All QLF devices had no difference with excellent diagnostic accuracies to detect non-cavitated enamel caries on smooth surface.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Inspektor Pro, QLF-D, Qraycam, Qraypen, Quantitative light-induced fluorescence, Validity
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|