Karin Herzog1, Mindi D'Elia2, Amy Kim2, Rebecca L Slayton2. 1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash., USA. kherzog12@gmail.com. 2. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash., USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study assessed the feasibility and ease of use of the Canary System in approximal carious lesion detection in primary molars. METHODS: Forty healthy five- to 12-year-olds, who presented to the Center for Pediatric Dentistry in Seattle, Wash., U.S.A., for initial or recall exams, were enrolled. Participants had one to two primary molars, with or without approximal radiographic radiolucencies. Four Canary System scans were performed at the approximal area of each study tooth. The maximum Canary number of the four scans was compared to bitewing radiographs. RESULTS: Seventy-five teeth were included in the final analysis. All study patients easily tolerated being scanned with the Canary System. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Canary System, when compared to bitewing radiographs, was 81 percent and 35 percent, respectively. Among teeth without radiographic radiolucencies, the Canary System identified 65 percent (31 of 48) of study teeth as having carious lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The Canary System is a safe approximal caries detection device in five- to 12-year-olds. When compared to bitewing radiographs, the specificity of the Canary System for approximal carious lesion detection in primary molars was low. However, this could indicate that the Canary System is detecting lesions earlier than radiographs.
PURPOSE: This study assessed the feasibility and ease of use of the Canary System in approximal carious lesion detection in primary molars. METHODS: Forty healthy five- to 12-year-olds, who presented to the Center for Pediatric Dentistry in Seattle, Wash., U.S.A., for initial or recall exams, were enrolled. Participants had one to two primary molars, with or without approximal radiographic radiolucencies. Four Canary System scans were performed at the approximal area of each study tooth. The maximum Canary number of the four scans was compared to bitewing radiographs. RESULTS: Seventy-five teeth were included in the final analysis. All study patients easily tolerated being scanned with the Canary System. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Canary System, when compared to bitewing radiographs, was 81 percent and 35 percent, respectively. Among teeth without radiographic radiolucencies, the Canary System identified 65 percent (31 of 48) of study teeth as having carious lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The Canary System is a safe approximal caries detection device in five- to 12-year-olds. When compared to bitewing radiographs, the specificity of the Canary System for approximal carious lesion detection in primary molars was low. However, this could indicate that the Canary System is detecting lesions earlier than radiographs.