Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 5, 2025

Mimicking and Measuring Occlusal Erosive Tooth Wear with the "Rub&Roll" and Non-contact Profilometry
Published on: February 2, 2018
How combining different caries lesions characteristics may be helpful in short-term caries progression prediction:
Isabela Floriano1,2, Elizabeth Souza Rocha2, Ronilza Matos1,3
1Department of Orthodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo, Avenida Professor Lineu Prestes, 2227, Cidade Universitária, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Background:
Few studies have addressed the clinical parameters' predictive power related to caries lesion associated with their progression. This study assessed the predictive validity and proposed simplified models to predict short-term caries progression using clinical parameters related to caries lesion activity status.
Methods:
The occlusal surfaces of primary molars, presenting no frank cavitation, were examined according to the following clinical predictors: colour, luster, cavitation, texture, and clinical depth. After one year, children were re-evaluated using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System to assess caries lesion progression. Progression was set as the outcome to be predicted. Univariate multilevel Poisson models were fitted to test each of the independent variables (clinical features) as predictors of short-term caries progression. The multimodel inference was made based on the Akaike Information Criteria and C statistic. Afterwards, plausible interactions among some of the variables were tested in the models to evaluate the benefit of combining these variables when assessing caries lesions.
Results:
205 children (750 surfaces) presented no frank cavitations at the baseline. After one year, 147 children were reassessed (70%). Finally, 128 children (733 surfaces) presented complete baseline data and had included primary teeth to be reassessed. Approximately 9% of the reassessed surfaces showed caries progression. Among the univariate models created with each one of these variables, the model containing the surface integrity as a predictor had the lowest AIC (364.5). Univariate predictive models tended to present better goodness-of-fit (AICs < 388) and discrimination (C:0.959-0.966) than those combining parameters (AIC:365-393, C:0.958-0.961). When only non-cavitated surfaces were considered, roughness compounded the model that better predicted the lesions' progression (AIC = 217.7, C:0.91).
Conclusions:
Univariate model fitted considering the presence of cavitation show the best predictive goodness-of-fit and discrimination. For non-cavitated lesions, the simplest way to predict those lesions that tend to progress is by assessing enamel roughness. In general, the evaluation of other conjoint parameters seems unnecessary for all non-frankly cavitated lesions.
More Related Videos
07:42Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
07:26Systematic Assessment of Mammalian Skull Specimens for Dental and Temporomandibular Joint Pathology
Published on: August 22, 2022
Related Concept Videos
Tooth Anatomy
The Crown, Neck, and Root
The visible part of the tooth is referred to as the crown. It's covered by enamel, the hardest substance in the human body. The crown is uniquely shaped for each type of tooth, allowing for different functions such as cutting, tearing, or...
Teeth
In the bud stage, the tooth germ (an aggregation of cells) starts to form in the developing jawbone. During the cap stage, the tooth germ differentiates into enamel organ, dental papilla, and dental sac, which will later develop into the tooth's enamel, dentin...
Assessment of the Mouth
Mouth Inspection
The inspection begins with visually examining the mouth for symmetry, color, and size.