| Literature DB >> 24952612 |
Joanna Baginska1, Ewa Rodakowska, Robert Milewski, Anna Kierklo.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No reports on a caries pattern covering the full spectrum of the disease could be found in the literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate caries in primary and first permanent molars of 7-8-year-old Polish children by the Caries Assessment Spectrum and Treatment (CAST) index and to find whether there was any correlation between the caries stages in such teeth.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24952612 PMCID: PMC4074582 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6831-14-74
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Description of CAST codes
| Sound | 0 | No visible evidence of a distinct carious lesion is present | Healthy |
| Sealed | 1 | Pits and/or fissures are at least partially sealed with a sealant material | |
| Restored | 2 | A cavity is restored with a (in)direct restorative material | |
| Enamel | 3 | Distinct visual change in enamel only. A clear caries discolouration is visible with or without localised enamel breakdown | Reversible premorbidity |
| Dentin | 4 | Internal caries-related discolouration in dentine. The discoloured dentine is visible through enamel which may or may not exhibit a visible localised breakdown of enamel | Morbidity |
| 5 | Distinct cavitation into dentine. The pulp chamber is intact | ||
| Pulp | 6 | Involvement of pulp chamber. Distinct cavitation reaching the pulp chamber or only root fragments are present | Serious morbidity |
| Abscess/Fistula | 7 | A pus containing swelling or a pus releasing sinus tract related to a tooth with pulpal involvement | |
| Lost | 8 | The tooth has been removed because of dental caries | Mortality |
| Other | 9 | Does not correspond to any of the other categories |
Figure 1The percentage of children according to the highest CAST category in primary and permanent dentition.
Distribution of CAST codes in evaluated molar teeth
| 51.4 | 29.2 | 2.1 | 14.4 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 0 | 0 | |
| 50 | 29.6 | 3.5 | 15.5 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 39.4 | 34.9 | 7.7 | 13.7 | 1.4 | 2.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 43.7 | 32.4 | 9.2 | 12.3 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 34.2 | 0 | 26.1 | 13 | 2.8 | 14.1 | 7.7 | 0 | 2.1 | |
| 36.3 | 0 | 23.6 | 11.3 | 4.6 | 14.4 | 7.7 | 0 | 2.1 | |
| 38 | 0.7 | 27.8 | 13.4 | 3.2 | 8.1 | 6.7 | 0 | 2.1 | |
| 33.5 | 0.7 | 29.2 | 12.7 | 3.2 | 9.2 | 9.2 | 0 | 2.5 | |
| 36.6 | 0 | 23.9 | 3.9 | 1.1 | 12.7 | 13.7 | 0.4 | 7.7 | |
| 34.9 | 0 | 23.2 | 6 | 1.1 | 15.8 | 12.3 | 1.4 | 5.3 | |
| 27.8 | 0 | 39.1 | 2.8 | 1.4 | 14.1 | 10.6 | 0.7 | 3.5 | |
| 26.4 | 0 | 32.4 | 5.3 | 0.7 | 17.6 | 12.7 | 0.4 | 4.6 |
Figure 2Distribution of evaluated molar teeth according to the epidemiological concept of health proposed by Frencken et al. [7].
The correlations of CAST codes in evaluated molar teeth (Spearman’s correlation coefficient)
| Left-right correlations | |||
| 16/26 | 0.513 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 46/36 | 0.638 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 55/65 | 0.501 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 85/75 | 0.594 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 54/64 | 0.611 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 84/74 | 0.495 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| Neighbouring teeth correlations | |||
| 16/55 | 0.132 | 0.025 | NS |
| 26/65 | 0.093 | 0.114 | NS |
| 36/75 | 0.236 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 46/85 | 0.248 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 55/54 | 0.472 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 65/64 | 0.627 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 75/74 | 0.513 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 85/84 | 0.483 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| Upper-lower jaw correlations | |||
| 16/46 | 0.401 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 26/36 | 0.412 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 55/85 | 0.490 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 54/84 | 0.330 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 65/75 | 0.456 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| 64/74 | 0.426 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
*Bonferroni correction, NS – non-significant.