Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36112228›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2023

Accuracy of different approaches for detecting proximal root caries lesions in vitro.

Gerd Göstemeyer, Mareike Preus, Karim Elhennawy, Falk Schwendicke, Sebastian Paris, Haitham Askar

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gerd GöstemeyerDepartment of Operative, Preventive and Pediatric Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Assmannshauser Straße 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany. gerd.goestemeyer@charite.de.
Mareike PreusDepartment of Operative, Preventive and Pediatric Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Assmannshauser Straße 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Karim ElhennawyDepartment of Orthodontics, Dentofacial Orthopedics and Pedodontics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Assmannshauser Straße 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Falk SchwendickeDepartment of Oral Diagnostics, Digital Health and Health Services Research, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Assmannshauser Straße 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian ParisDepartment of Operative, Preventive and Pediatric Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Assmannshauser Straße 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Haitham AskarDepartment of Operative, Preventive and Pediatric Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Assmannshauser Straße 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe objective was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of radiographic evaluation (XR), visual-tactile assessment (VT), laser-fluorescence (LF) (DIAGNOdent Pen/KaVo), and near-infrared-light transillumination (NILT) (DIAGNOcam/KaVo) on proximal root caries lesions in vitro.

methodsTwo-hundred extracted permanent premolars and molars with and without proximal root caries lesions were allocated to 50 diagnostic models simulating the proximal contacts between teeth and mounted in a phantom dummy head. Two independent examiners used the diagnostic approaches to detect any or advanced root caries lesions, with histologic evaluation of the lesions serving as reference. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were employed, and sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) are calculated. Significant differences in mean AUCs between approaches were assumed if p < 0.05 (two-sample t-test).

resultsNILT was not applicable for proximal root caries detection. The sensitivity/specificity to detect any lesions was 0.81/0.63 for XR, 0.76/0.88 for VT and 0.81/0.95 for LF, and the sensitivity/specificity to detect advanced lesions was 0.43/0.94 for XR, 0.66/0.99 for VT, and 0.83/0.78 for LF, respectively. For both, any and advanced root caries lesions, mean AUCs for LF and VT were significantly higher compared to XR (p < 0.05). For any root caries lesions, LF was significantly more accurate than VT (p = 0.01), but not for advanced root caries lesions (p = 0.59).

conclusionsUnder the in vitro conditions chosen, LF and VT were more accurate than XR to detect proximal root caries lesions, with LF being particularly useful for initial lesion stages. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: LF might be a useful diagnostic aid for proximal root caries diagnosis. Clinical studies are necessary to corroborate the findings.

Indexed as

Dental CariesRoot CariesHumansReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityCaries diagnosisGeriatric dentistryLaser-fluorescenceNear-infrared transilluminationProximal cariesRoot caries

Identifiers

PMID36112228
PMCPMC9985551
OpenAlexW4296029762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.