Publicado Jun 30, 2013



PLUMX
Google Scholar
 
Search GoogleScholar
Descargas


Stefania Martignon Biermann

Sergio Uribe

Ana María Pulido

Andrea Cortés

Luis Fernando Gamboa Martínez

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Resumen

Antecedentes: El manejo óptimo de una lesión de caries involucra un diagnóstico precisoy confiable, junto con una decisión apropiada de tratamiento. El método diagnósticotradicional sigue siendo el visual-táctil y se enfoca en detectar lesiones cavitacionales.Actualmente se conocen sistemas de clasificación de la caries dental que incluyen laslesiones tempranas de caries y permiten optar por un tratamiento no operatorio o por unooperatorio. La radiografía se reconoce como un complemento para el diagnóstico actualde caries dental. La concordancia entre el examen de caries visual-táctil y el radiográficopara caries interproximal varía según la prevalencia de caries. Propósito: Comparar elnúmero de lesiones interproximales de caries detectadas mediante examen visual-táctil yradiográfico (radiografías coronales). Métodos: Se realizó examen visual-táctil y radiográficoen 40 sujetos (16-35 años de edad). Se calculó el acuerdo entre exámenes mediante kappano ponderado. Resultados: El COP-D promedio fue de 4,9 ± 3,4 (C: 0,2 ± 0,4; O: 4,9 ± 3,4; P: 0).En los dientes posteriores el examen visual-táctil mostró un CO-S promedio de 5 ± 4 (C: 0,2 ±0,5) y el radiográfico de 16,0 ± 3,4 (radiolucidez dentinaria: 2,9 ± 1,7; en esmalte: 13,1 ± 3,3). Elnivel de acuerdo (coeficiente kappa) entre la prueba visual-táctil y la radiografía fue insignificante(0,0012-0,08). Conclusión: El examen radiográfico detecta un 220 % más lesionesde caries interproximal que el visual-táctil en dientes posteriores, lo que permite resaltar laimportancia del examen radiográfico para la detección de caries dental.

 

Background: The optimal management of a caries lesion involves a precise and reliablediagnosis along with an appropriate treatment decision. The traditional diagnostic methodcontinues being the visual-tactile and it is focused in the detection of cavitated lesions.Currently, caries classification systems that include the early caries lesions and allow fornon-operative or operative treatment decisions are known. The radiography is known as acomplement for the current diagnosis of dental caries. The agreement between the visualtactileand the radiographic caries tests varies depending upon the caries prevalence. Purpose:To compare the number of proximal caries lesions detected radiographically and thevisual-tactile method. Methods: Visual-tactile (DMF-S criteria) and radiographic (bite-wingx-rays) examinations were conducted in 40 16-to-35 year olds. Results: The mean DMF-T was4.9±3.4 (D: 0.2±0.4; M: 0; F: 4.9±3.4). The visual-tactile exam in the posterior teeth showed amean DF-S of 5.0±4.0 (D: 0.2±0.5), and the radiographic of 16.0±3.4 (Radiolucency in dentine:2.9±1.7; in enamel: 13.1±3.3). The level of agreement (Kappa coefficient) between thevisual-tactile and the radiographic methods was insignificant (0.0012-0.08). Conclusion: Theradiographic exam detects 220 % more proximal caries lesions than the visual-tactile examin posterior teeth, which allows emphasizing the importance of the radiographic examinationfor the detection of dental caries.

Keywords
References
1. Ekstrand KR, Rickets DNJ, Kidd EAM. Occlusal caries: pathology, diagnosis and logical management. Dent Update. 2001; 28: 380-7.
2. Baelum V. What is an appropriate caries diagnosis? Acta Odontol Scand. 2010; 68: 65-79.
3. Verdonschot EH, Angmar-Månsson B, ten Bosch JJ, Deery CH, Huysmans MC, Pitts NB, Waller E. Developments in caries diagnosis and their relationship to treatment decisions and quality of care. ORCA Saturday Afternoon Symposium 1997. Caries Res. 1999; 33: 32-40.
4. Lussi A. Validity of diagnostic and treatment decisions of fissure caries. Caries Res. 1991; 25: 296-303.
5. Ketley CE, Holt RD. Visual and radiographic diagnosis of occlusal caries in first permanent molars and in second primary molars. Br Dent J. 1993; 174: 364-70.
6. Pitts N. "ICDAS" - an international system for caries detection and assessment being developed to facilitate caries epidemiology, research and appropriate clinical management. Community Dent Health. 2004; 21: 193-8.
7. Ismail AI, Sohn W, Tellez M, Amaya A, Sen A, Hasson H, Pitts NB. The International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS): an integrated system for measuring dental caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007; 35: 170-8.
8. Pitts NB. How the detection, assessment, diagnosis and monitoring of caries integrate with personalized caries management. Monogr Oral Sci. 2009; 21: 1-14.
9. Baelum V, Hintze H, Wenzel A, Danielsen B, Nyvad B. Implications of caries diagnostic strategies for clinical management decisions. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012; 40: 257-66.
10. Pitts NB, Rimmer PA. An in vivo comparison of radiographic and directly assessed clinical caries status of posterior approximal surfaces in primary and permanent teeth. Caries Res. 1992; 26: 146-52.
11. Wenzel A. Current trends in radiographic caries imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1995; 80: 527-39.
12. Pretty I, Maupomé A. A closer look at diagnosis in clinical dental practice: Part 1. Reliability, validity, specificity and sensitivity of diagnostic procedures. J Can Dent Assoc. 2004; 70: 251-5.
13. Hintze H, Wenzel A, Danielsen B, Nyvad B. Reliability of visual examination, fibre-optic transillumination, and bite-wing radiography, and reproducibility of direct visual examination following tooth separation for the identification of cavitated carious lesions in contacting approximal surfaces. Caries Res. 1998; 32: 204-9.
14. Machiulskiene V, Nyvad B, Baelum V. A comparison of clinical and radiographic caries diagnoses in posterior teeth of 12-year-old Lithuanian children. Caries Res. 1999; 33: 340-8.
15. Kidd EAM, Banerjee A, Ferrier S, Longbottom C, Nugent Z. Relationships between a clinical-visual scoring system and two histological techniques: A laboratory study on occlusal and approximal carious lesions. Caries Res. 2003; 37: 125-9.
16. Bille J, Thylstrup A. Radiographic diagnosis and clinical tissue changes in relation to treatment of approximal carious lesions. Caries Res. 1982; 16: 1-6.
17. Ekstrand KR, Luna LE, Promisiero L, Cortes A, Cuevas S, Reyes JF, Torres CE, Martignon S. The reliability and accuracy of two methods for proximal caries detection and depth on directly visible proximal surfaces: an in vitro study. Caries Res. 2011; 45: 93-9.
18. Chu CH, Chung BT, Lo EC: Caries assessment by clinical examination with or without radiographs of young Chinese adults. Int Dent J. 2008; 58: 265-8.
19. Dummer PMH, Addy M, Oliver SJ, Shaw WC. Changes in the distribution of decayed and filled tooth surfaces and the progression of approximal caries in children between the ages of 11-12 years and 15-16 years. Br Dent J. 1988; 164: 277-82.
20. Mejàre I, Stenlund H, Zelezny-Holmlund C. Caries incidence and lesion progression from adolescence to young adulthood: a prospective 15-year cohort study in Sweden. Caries Res. 2004; 38: 130-41.
21. Marthaler TM. Changes in dental caries. Caries Res. 2004; 38: 173-81.
22. Martignon S, Chavarría N, Ekstrand KR. Caries status and proximal lesion behaviour during a 6-year period in young adult Danes: an epidemiological investigation. Clin Oral Investig. 2010; 14: 383-90.
23. Stecksén-Blicks C, Kieri C, Nyman JE, Pilebro C, Borssén E. Caries prevalence and background factors in Swedish 4-year-old children - a 40-year perspective. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2008; 18: 317-24.
24. Poorterman JH, Vermaire EH, Hoogstraten J. Value of bitewing radiographs for detecting approximal caries in 6-year-old children in the Netherlands. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2010; 20: 336-40.
25. Hopcraft MS, Morgan MV. Comparison of radiographic and clinical diagnosis of approximal and occlusal dental caries in a young adult population. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2005; 33: 212-8.
26. Martignon S, Ekstrand KR, Gomez J, Lara JS, Cortes A. Infiltrating/Sealing Proximal Caries Lesions: A 3-year Randomized Clinical Trial. J Dent Res. 2012; 9: 288-92.
27. Bratthall D, Hänsel Petersson G, Stjernswärd JR. Cariogram. Internet Version 2.01 [internet]. 2008. Disponible en: http://www.db.od.mah.se/car/cariogram/cariograminfo.html.
28. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977; 33: 159-74.
29. Martignon S, González MC, McCormick V, Ruiz JA, Jácome S, Guarnizo C. Guía de diagnóstico, prevención y tratamiento de la caries dental. Bogotá: Asociación Colombiana de Facultades de Odontología, Secretaría Distrital de Salud de Bogotá; 2007.
30. Pitts NB, Richards D. Personalized treatment planning. En: Pitts NB, editor. Detection, assessment, diagnosis and monitoring of caries. Monogr Oral Sci. 2009; 21: 128-43.
31. Pitts NB. Are we ready to move from operative to non-operative/preventive treatment of dental caries in clinical practice? Caries Res. 2004; 38: 294-304.
32. Marthaler TM, German M. Radiographic and visual appearance of small smooth surface caries lesions studied on extracted teeth. Caries Res. 1970; 4: 224-42.
33. Martignon S, Ekstrand KR, Ellwood R. Efficacy of sealing proximal early active lesions: an 18-month clinical study evaluated by conventional and subtraction radiography. Caries Res. 2006; 40: 382-8.
34. Martignon S, Tellez M, Santamaría RM, Gomez J, Ekstrand KR. Sealing distal proximal caries lesions in first primary molars: efficacy after 2.5 years. Caries Res. 2010; 44: 562-70.
35. Ekstrand KR, Bakhshandeh A, Martignon S. Treatment of proximal superficial caries lesions on primary molar teeth with resin infiltration and fluoride varnish versus fluoride varnish only: efficacy after 1 year. Caries Res. 2010; 44: 41-6.
36. Gordan V, Riley J, Carvalho R, Snyder J, Sanderson J, Anderson M, Gilbert G. Methods used by Dental Practice – Based Network dentist DPBND to diagnose dental caries Oper Dent 2011; 36: 2-11.
37. Pitts N. Preventive and minimal intervention dentistry in the undergraduate curriculum. J Dent 2011;39 Suppl 2: S41-8.
38. Código de Ética Odontológica Colombiana [internet]. 2012. Disponible en: http://www.dmsjuridica.com/RESPONSABILIDAD .
39. Gowda S, Thomson WM, Foster Page LA, Croucher NA. What difference does using bitewing radiographs make to epidemiological estimates of dental caries prevalence and severity in a young adolescent population with high caries experience? Caries Res 2009; 43: 436-41.
40. Lillehagen M, Grindefjord M, Mejare I. Detection of approximal caries by clinical and radiographic examination in 9-year-old Swedish children. Caries Res. 2007; 41: 177-85.
Cómo citar
Martignon Biermann, S., Uribe, S., Pulido, A. M., Cortés, A., & Gamboa Martínez, L. F. (2013). Comparación entre el examen radiográfico y el visual-táctil para detectar y valorar caries dental interproximal / Comparison between Radiographic and Visual-Tactile Exams for the Detection and Assessment of Proximal Caries. Universitas Odontologica, 32(68), 25-31. Recuperado a partir de https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/revUnivOdontologica/article/view/SICI%3A%202027-3444%28201301%2932%3A68%3C25%3ACERVTD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y
Sección
Dossier Temático

Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a