The study compared visual inspection, conventional film radiographs, xeroradiographs, and digitized radiographs for the detection of caries in occlusal surfaces without cavitation. 166 extracted premolars and permanent molars without macroscopic cavitation were included. Eight observers assessed five grades of occlusal caries by visual inspection and by the three imaging techniques. Histologic sections (700–1,000 μm) served as validating criterion for the presence and depth of carious lesions, 82 teeth being found carious (27 with deep dentinal involvement) and 84 being scored as sound. Approximately 20% of the dentinal carious lesions were detected by visual inspection and 40% by conventional film radiography (both with a minimal number of false-positive observations). By xero- and digital radiography, an increasing number of false-positive scorings was seen. By digital radiography the true-positive detection rate was similarly increased to 60%. The predictive values of a positive test were, on average, 0.85 for visual inspection, 0.89 for film, 0.78 for xero-, and 0.82 for digital radiography and for a negative test 0.56, 0.61, 0.61, and 0.69, respectively. However, digital radiography was able to detect over 70% of deep dentinal lesions in contrast to 45% by the other two imaging methods, without an increase in false-positive diagnoses of truly caries free teeth, compared with the other techniques.

Keywords:
Dental caries, Image processing, computer-assisted, Radiography, Xeroradiography
This content is only available via PDF.
© 1991 S. Karger AG, Basel
1991
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.