The purpose of this study was to compare reproducibility in the assessment of caries lesion behaviour in digital subtraction images and conventional radiographs. Ninety–seven pairs of conventional film bite–wings were included. The radiographs had been taken with a Kwik–Bite filmholder without further standardisation. The selection criterion was that at least one surface imaged in a bite–wing pair should show progresssion of a caries lesion from the first exposure to the second. The time interval between the bite–wings was 1–2 years. The radiographs were scanned into a personal computer and the two images from the same patient subtracted. Seven observers scored the subtraction images and the conventional films. The scale was based on no change/ change in surface appearance scored in the following categories: 0 = no change; 1 = development of a new caries lesion in enamel; 2 = development of caries lesion in enamel and dentine/progression of an existing enamel lesion into dentine/progression of a dentinal lesion further into dentine; 3 = development of secondary caries; 4 = new filling/change of filling/extension of filling. Cohen’s κ coefficients were calculated for intra– and inter–observer agreement for the two radiographic methods separately. The κ value served as the statistical sampling unit for testing differences between the two methods (Wilcoxon’s test for ranked pairs). The average intra–observer κ value was 0.875 (range 0.775–0.958) for the subtraction images and 0.758 (range 0.560–0.890) for the conventional radiographs. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). For inter–observer agreement, the κ values were lower than for intra–observer agreement. The average value was 0.678 (range 0.485–0.754) for the subtraction images and 0.701 (range 0.497–0.817) for the conventional radiographs (p>0.1). This study suggests a new way of comparing reproducibility in terms of κ values between diagnostic methods in clinical studies where accuracy cannot be evaluated. The subtraction method may be useful in the assessment of caries lesion behaviour in the clinic.

Keywords:
Dental caries, Radiography, Subtraction
This content is only available via PDF.
2000
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.