| PubMed ID | Author / Year | Patient Group | Study type (level of evidence) |
| 23450799 | Shimada/2013 | 86 proximal surfaces of 53 patients | Case Series Experimental Study |
| Key results | Shimada Y et. al., concluded that “SS-OCT appears to be a more reliable and accurate method than bite wing radiographs for the detection and estimation of the depth of proximal lesions in the clinical environment.” | ||
| 20848554 | Holtzman/2010 | 40 extracted teeth | Lab Study |
| Key results | Holtzman JS et. al., concluded that "In this ex vivo study, dentists were able to detect tooth decay beneath four commonly used dental sealants based on OCT images. Clinical investigations are now underway to determine the usefulness of this approach in vivo” and stated that “Agreement with histology (Cohen’s kappa) was best for OCT pre-sealant (k=0.886), followed by clinical exam (k=0.700) and OCT post-sealant (k=0.634). Radiographs agreed very poorly with histology: k(pre-sealant=0.091; k(post-sealant)=0.251. As evaluated using positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV), detection of demineralization or caries was more accurate using OCT than with visual or radiographic examination. OCT was somewhat better in detecting lesions prior to sealant placement (PPV=0.929, NPV=1.000) than once sealants were in place (PPV=0.913, NPV=0.708). This effect varied in size depending on the type of sealant used, with OCT-diagnostics most accurate when Delton was used. The accuracy of radiographic diagnosis vs. histology as determined by PPV and NPV was overall not very good, and interestingly, it appeared to be somewhat more accurate after sealant placement (PPV=0.909, NPV=0.448) than before (PPV=0.833, NPV=0.382). ”Cohen's Kappa, Sensitivity, PPV, and NPV were 0.886, 1.000, 0.929, and 1.000 respectively for OCT(Pre-sealant) and 0.634, 0.808, 0.913,and 0.706 for OCT (Post-sealant). | ||
| 23146817 | Gomez/2013 | 112 permanent extracted teeth | Lab Study |
| Key results | Gomez et. al., concluded that “even though all methods present similar performance in detecting occlusal caries lesions, visual inspection seems to be sufficient to be used in clinical practice for detection and assessment of lesion depth. Other methods may be useful in monitoring caries lesion behaviour. ”Correlation coefficient for OCT vs. histology was 0.65 with P<0.01, and with sensitivity of 0.98,0.95 and 0.32 and specificity of 0.52, 0.39, and 0.98 for sound, enamel level, and dentin level measured layers respectively. | ||
| 23450799 | Maia/2010 | 6 Primary teeth | Lab Study |
| Key results | Maia AM et. al., concluded that "The technique showed great potential to be used on pediatric dentistry clinical on early caries detection with no pain, as it is a noninvasive method." The correlation index (95%) for the 3 measured layers; OCT 840 nm, OCT 1300 nm and histology were 0.347–0.429, 0.362–0.451 and 0.355–0.437 respectively with a standard deviation of 0.174,0.188 and 0.175 with a P value of 0.823. | ||
| 23084870 | Nakagawa/2013 | 93 Extracted teeth | Lab study |
| Key results | Nakagawa H et. al., concluded that "OCT can give clinicians information about internal tooth structure and will help clinical decision making on surgical intervention. "For the 9 years examiners with regards to visual inspection (VI), sensitivity and specificity were 0.96 and 0.78 , and 0.49 and 0.97 (for the second cut off), versus 0.98 and 0.67 (for the first cut off) and 0.59 and 0.84 (for the second cut off) for the 3 years examiners. With regards to SS-OCT, results for the 9 years examiners were 0.97 and 0.98 (for the first cut off) and 0.96 and 0.95 (for the second cut off) versus 0.98 and 0.89 (for the first cut off) and 0.64 and 0.91 (for the second cut off). | ||
The Evidence
| Basic Science Rationale (Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?) |
| None available |
| Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT (FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS', FACULTY, RESIDENTS and/or STUDENTS COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs) |
| None available |