Aim: This study is aimed at evaluating and comparing the remineralisation of early enamel caries on the occlusal surface of permanent posterior teeth using ICDAS II caries scoring system and DIAGNOdent Pen (DDPen) after remineralisation with Colgate Duraphat® and GC Tooth Mousse Plus®.
Materials and Methods: Extracted posterior teeth (N = 120) with incipient occlusal caries were included in this study. The occlusal surface of each tooth was scored using DDPen and ICDAS II scoring before remineralisation. Then, remineralisation of the teeth of the experimental group was carried out using either CPP-ACP-F or fluoride varnish. After the remineralisation procedures, the occlusal surface of each tooth was again scored using DDPen and ICDAS II scoring. The teeth were then fixed in dental stone blocks and sectioned longitudinally for histological examination using a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis was performed to calculate the sensitivity and specificity of DDPen and ICDAS II to detect remineralisation and compare with the gold standard histological examination.
Results: According to ICDAS-II scores, a significant difference was noted in GC Tooth Mousse Plus® and Duraphat® study samples, whereas the difference between the pre-and post-remineralisation of the control group was not significant. According to the DDPen score criteria, a statistically significant difference was noted among all study groups; however, a greater significance level was noted in the GC Tooth Mousse Plus® and Duraphat® study samples compared with the control group. The Spearman's rank correlation of ICDAS-II and DDPen with Downer's histological score (gold standard) revealed a higher association of DDPen score (.738) as compared to ICDAS-II scores (.430).
Conclusion: The study concluded that both ICDAS II and DDPen could detect remineralisation of early enamel occlusal caries. DDPen was more sensitive than ICDAS-II to detect remineralisation compared with the Downers histological scores.
METHODS: Visible proximal surfaces of extracted human teeth were assessed by ICDAS-II before setting them in five manikin mouth models. Then contacting proximal surfaces in mouth models were assessed by BW and CS. Histological validation with polarized-light microscopy served as a gold standard. Pairwise comparisons were performed on area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of the three methods, and corrected using Bonferroni's method. Sensitivities and specificities were compared using a test of proportions and AUC values were compared using DeLong's method.
RESULTS: The CS presented significantly higher sensitivity (0.933) than ICDAS-II (0.733, P = 0.01) and BW (0.267, P