A comparative study to diagnose the accuracy of E-speed film, complimentary metal oxide semiconductor and storage phosphor systems in the detection of proximal caries: An in vitro study

  • Authors

    • Tatapudi Ramesh Vishnu Dental College
    • Gurugubelli Upendra Vishnu Dental College
    • Bandaru Sravani Krishna Vishnu Dental College
    • Sahithi Dathar Vishnu Dental College
    • Priyankesh Sinha Vishnu Dental College
    • Raghavendra M.N Vishnu Dental College
    • Myla Swathi Vishnu Dental College
    • K Roja Vara Lakshmi Vishnu Dental College
    2016-01-24
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijdr.v4i1.5717
  • Proximal caries, Film, CMOS, PSP

  • Abstract

    Background: Dental caries is one of the most commonly encountered conditions in clinical dentistry and these lesions remain undetected when confined to the vicinity of inter-proximal surfaces. Radiography plays a key role in the detection of inter-proximal caries especially in tight contacts.

    Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of E-speed film, complementary metal oxide semiconductors (CMOS) and storage phosphor systems (PSP) in the detection of proximal caries of the posterior teeth.

    Methods: Conventional films, CMOS and PSP images were used in detecting proximal caries on mesial and distal surfaces of 63 teeth (126 surfaces). Interpretation of all digital and conventional radiographs were performed and reanalyzed by four observers. The collected data was subjected to statistical analysis using chi square test, weighed kappa statistics and spearman rank correlation coefficient.

    Results: The PSP images showed more accurate results in identifying normal tooth, enamel caries, dentinal caries and deep dental caries and kappa statistics had represented almost perfect reading of 0.8 – 0.9 for PSP images whereas CMOS images showed substantial reading of 0.6 – 0.7, and for IOPA images it showed moderate reading of 0.5 – 0.6, which stated that the higher inter-observer agreement was obtained for PSP images when compared with images taken by IOPA and CMOS. The intra-observer reliability by kappa statistics had shown highly significant value (0.82) in the present study.

    Conclusion: Conventional films, CMOS and PSP images had shown almost appropriate results in the detection of proximal caries but PSP receptors were better in disclosing the details more accurately in terms of delineating the actual extent of the lesion pertaining to their high resolution capacity and further their flexibility made them easier during handling the radiograph, when compared with that of rigid CMOS receptors.

  • References

    1. [1] Abesi F, Mirshekar A, Moudi E, Seyedmajidi M, Haghanifar S, Haghighat N, Bijani A.(2012) Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Radiography in the Detection of Non-CavitatedApproximal Dental Caries. Iran J Radiol. 9:17-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.5812/iranjradiol.6747.

      [2] Abreu M, Mol A, Ludlow JB. (2001) Performance of RVGui sensor and Kodak Ektaspeed Plus film for proximal caries detection. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral RadiolEndod. 91:381-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/moe.2001.112393.

      [3] Bader JD, Shugars DA, Bonito AJ. (2001) Systematic Reviews of Selected Dental Caries Diagnostic and Management Methods Journal of Dental Education.65:960-8

      [4] Erten H, Uctasli MB, Akarslan ZZ, Uzun O, Semiz M.(2006) Restorative Treatment Decision Making with Unaided Visual Examination, Intraoral Camera and Operating Microscope. Operative Dentistry, 3:55-59 http://dx.doi.org/10.2341/04-173.

      [5] Haiter-Neto F, Wenzel A and Gotfredsen E. (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography scans compared with intraoral image modalities for detection of caries lesions. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology.37:18–22 http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/87103878.

      [6] Hintze H, Wenzel A and Frydenberg M. (2002) Accuracy of caries detection with four storage phosphor systems and E-speed radiographs. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology.31:170-175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600686.

      [7] Kamburoglu K, Senel B, Yuksel SP and Ozen T. (2010) A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of in vivo and in vitro photostimulable phosphor digital images in the detection of occlusal caries lesions. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 39:17–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/91657756.

      [8] Ludlow JB, Mol A. Digital imaging. In: White SC, Pharoah MJ (eds). (2004) Oral radiology: Principles and interpretation (5th ed). St.Louis: Mosby. 225–244.

      [9] Pereira AC, Eggertsson H, Moustafa A, Zero DT, Eckert GJ, Mialhe FL.(2009) Evaluation of three radiographic methods for detecting occlusal caries lesions.Braz J Oral Sci.8(2):67-70

      [10] Peker I, ToramanAlkurt M, Usalan G, Altunkaynak B. (2009) the comparison of subjective image quality in conventional and digital panoramic radiography. Indian J Dent Res 20:21-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.49052.

      [11] Pontual AA, de Melo DP, de Almeida SM, Boscolo FN and HaiterNeto F. (2010) Comparison of digital systems and conventional dental film for the detection of approximal enamel caries. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 39:431–436 http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/94985823.

      [12] Rocha A S P S da, Almeida S M de, Boscolo F N, HaiterNeto F.(2005)Interexaminer agreement in caries radiographic diagnosis by conventional and digital radiographs. J Appl Oral Sci.13:329-33 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572005000400003.

      [13] Rockenbach M.I, Veeck EB, Pereira da Costa N.(2008) Detection of proximal caries in conventional and digital radiographs: an in vitro study. Stomatologija, Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal. 10:115-120

      [14] Senel B, Kamburoglu K, Ucok O, Yuksel SP, Ozen T and Avsever H. (2010) Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities in detection of proximal caries. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology.39:501–511 http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/28628723.

      [15] Syriopoulos K, Sanderink GCH, Velders XL and van der Stelt PF.(2000) Radiographic detection of approximal caries: a comparison of dental films and digital imaging systems. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology.29:312-318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600553.

      [16] Tantanapornkul W, Mongkolrop P, Manoping P, Hannanta-anant A, Prompruk E.(2012) Efficacy of Different Image Processing Programs in Detecting Small Artificial Caries Defects on Approximal Surfaces. Dentistry. 2:1-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2161-1122.1000129.

      [17] Torres MGG, Santos AS, Neves FS, Arriaga ML, Campos PSF, Crusoe-rebello I.(2011) Assessment of enamel-dentin caries lesions detection using bitewing PSP digital images. J Appl Oral Sci. 19:462-8

      [18] Wenzel, A. (1998) Digital radiography and caries diagnosis: a review. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 27:3-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600321.

      [19] White SC and Yoon DC. (1997) Comparative performance of digital and conventional images for detecting proximal surface caries. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology.26:32-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600208.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Ramesh, T., Upendra, G., Sravani Krishna, B., Dathar, S., Sinha, P., M.N, R., Swathi, M., & Roja Vara Lakshmi, K. (2016). A comparative study to diagnose the accuracy of E-speed film, complimentary metal oxide semiconductor and storage phosphor systems in the detection of proximal caries: An in vitro study. International Journal of Dental Research, 4(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijdr.v4i1.5717

    Received date: 2015-12-31

    Accepted date: 2016-01-18

    Published date: 2016-01-24