Related Experiment Videos
A comparison of two histological validating techniques for occlusal caries
D N Ricketts1, T F Watson, P J Liepins
1Department of Conservative Dentistry, United Medical School, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
Journal of Dentistry
|April 16, 1998
Summary
Two histological methods for validating dental caries were compared. While both accurately identified caries, quantitative depth measurements showed some disagreement between techniques.
Area of Science:
- Dental Diagnostics
- Histopathology
- Caries Research
Background:
- Diagnostic technique validation is crucial for accuracy.
- The validation method itself can impact perceived diagnostic accuracy.
Purpose of the Study:
- To present two alternative histological validation techniques for occlusal caries.
- To compare quantitative depth measurements of carious lesions using these methods.
Main Methods:
- Examined 30 tooth sections using microfocal X-ray (macroradiographs) and confocal microscopy.
- Quantitative depth measurements of lesions were made relative to the enamel-dentine junction (EDJ).
Main Results:
- Both techniques agreed on the presence and extent of caries.
- Strong correlation found for dentine caries depth measurements (r=0.93).
- Macroradiograph depth measurements were larger than confocal measurements (mean difference 0.41 mm).
Conclusions:
- Both histological techniques effectively identify sound sites, enamel caries, and dentine caries.
- Quantitative assessments may differ between the macroradiograph and confocal microscopy methods.