Diagnostic performance of a new red light LED device for approximal caries detection

The aim of this study was to test a newly developed LED-based fluorescence device for approximal caries detection in vitro. We assembled 120 extracted molars without frank cavitations or fillings pairwise in order to create contact areas. The teeth were independently assessed by two examiners using visual caries detection (International Caries Detection and Assessment System, ICDAS), bitewing radiography (BW), laser fluorescence (LFpen), and LED fluorescence (Midwest Caries I.D., MW). The measurements were repeated at least 1 week later. The diagnostic performance was calculated with Bayesian analyses. Post-test probabilities were calculated in order to judge the diagnostic performance of combined methods. Reliability analyses were performed using kappa statistics for nominal data and intraclass correlation (ICC) for absolute data. Histology served as the gold standard. Sensitivities/specificities at the enamel threshold were 0.33/0.84 for ICDAS, 0.23/0.86 for BW, 0.47/0.78 for LFpen, and 0.32/0.87 for MW. Sensitivities/specificities at the dentine threshold were 0.04/0.89 for ICDAS, 0.27/0.94 for BW, 0.39/0.84 for LFpen, and 0.07/0.96 for MW. Reliability data were fair to moderate for MW and good for BW and LFpen. The combination of ICDAS and radiography yielded the best diagnostic performance (post-test probability of 0.73 at the dentine threshold). The newly developed LED device is not able to be recommended for approximal caries detection. There might be too much signal loss during signal transduction from the occlusal aspect to the proximal lesion site and the reverse.

The role of patch testing in the management of oral lichenoid reactions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The distinction of oral lichenoid reactions from oral lichen planus may be difficult in a clinical setting. Our aims were to ascertain the utility of patch testing to confirm the association of oral lichenoid reactions with dental restorations and to identify the benefits of replacement of restorations, primarily made of amalgam. METHODS Patients seen in an oral medicine unit over a 10-year period diagnosed with oral lichenoid reactions, with oral lichen planus resistant to treatment or with atypical lichenoid features were included in this study. All had been subjected to skin patch testing. Histopathology reports blinded to patch test results were scrutinized. Patch-test-positive subjects were advised to have their restorations replaced. All were followed up to determine disease resolution for at least 3 months thereafter. RESULTS Among 115 patients, 67.8% patients reacted positive to a dental material and nearly a quarter to mercury or amalgam. No correlation was found between pathology and skin patch testing results (P = 0.44). A total of 87 patients were followed up in clinic, and among 26 patch-test-positive patients who had their amalgam fillings replaced, moderate to complete resolution was noted in 81%. CONCLUSIONS Skin patch testing is a valuable tool to confirm clinically suspected oral lichenoid reactions. Pathology diagnoses of oral lichenoid reactions did not correlate with patch test results. Prospective studies are needed to ascertain that a clinically suspected oral lichenoid reaction with a positive patch test result may resolve after the replacement of amalgam fillings.