Francisca Marro1, Wolfgang Jacquet2, Luc Martens3, Andrew Keeling4, David Bartlett5, Saoirse O'Toole6. 1. Department of Paediatric Dentistry, PAECOMEDIS research cluster, Gent University, C. Heymanslaan 10 (P8), B-9000, Gent, Belgium. Electronic address: francisca.marro@ugent.be. 2. Oral Health Research Group ORHE, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090, Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: Wjacquet@vub.ac.be. 3. Department of Paediatric Dentistry, PAECOMEDIS research cluster, Gent University, C. Heymanslaan 10 (P8), B-9000, Gent, Belgium. Electronic address: Luc.martens@ugent.be. 4. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Leeds School of Dentistry, Clarendon Way, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK. Electronic address: A.J.Keeling@leeds.ac.uk. 5. Department of Prosthodontics, King's College London Dental Institute, London, UK. Electronic address: David.bartlett@kcli.ac.uk. 6. Department of Prosthodontics, King's College London Dental Institute, London, UK. Electronic address: Saoirse.otoole@kcl.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate if quantitative analysis of intraoral scans of study models can identify erosive tooth wear progression. METHODS: Data were collected from a retrospective longitudinal study, using pre-and post-orthodontic treatment casts of 11-13 year olds, recorded at two consecutive appointments 29 months apart. Casts were digitised with intra-oral scanner TRIOS™ (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and first molar scan pairs used for analysis. Occlusal surfaces of each molar pair were visually assessed using the BEWE index as having no BEWE progression (n = 42) or BEWE progression (n = 54). Scan pairs were aligned and analysed for volume loss, maximum profile loss and mean profile loss in WearCompare (Leedsdigitaldentistry.com/wearcompare) using previously published protocols. Data were analysed in SPSS and not normal. Mann-Whitney U test with a Bonferroni correction assessed differences between progression groups. Receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curves were used to identify the sensitivity and specificity of quantified wear progression rates at determining visual wear progression. RESULTS: Surfaces with visible progression demonstrated a median volume loss of -2.19 mm3 (IQR-3.65, -0.91) compared to a median volume loss of -0.37 mm3 (IQR -1.02, 0.16) in the no visible progression group (p < 0.001). Mean profile loss was -75.2 μm (IQR-93.9, -61.0) and 63.2 μm (IQR -82.5, -49.7) for the progression and no-progression groups respectively (p = 0.018). Volume loss of -1.22mm3 represented a 79 % sensitivity and 61 % specificity. The estimated area under the curve for volume loss was 0.80 (95 %CI 0.71-0.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to propose rates of high wear progression in adolescents. Limited sensitivity and specificity confirms that quantitative analysis is an adjunct tool to be used alongside history taking and clinical judgement. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The rapid advancement of digital technologies may result in improved diagnosis in erosive tooth wear (ETW). Intra-oral scans and registration software are a promising adjunct for monitoring ETW progression in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate if quantitative analysis of intraoral scans of study models can identify erosive tooth wear progression. METHODS: Data were collected from a retrospective longitudinal study, using pre-and post-orthodontic treatment casts of 11-13 year olds, recorded at two consecutive appointments 29 months apart. Casts were digitised with intra-oral scanner TRIOS™ (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and first molar scan pairs used for analysis. Occlusal surfaces of each molar pair were visually assessed using the BEWE index as having no BEWE progression (n = 42) or BEWE progression (n = 54). Scan pairs were aligned and analysed for volume loss, maximum profile loss and mean profile loss in WearCompare (Leedsdigitaldentistry.com/wearcompare) using previously published protocols. Data were analysed in SPSS and not normal. Mann-Whitney U test with a Bonferroni correction assessed differences between progression groups. Receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curves were used to identify the sensitivity and specificity of quantified wear progression rates at determining visual wear progression. RESULTS: Surfaces with visible progression demonstrated a median volume loss of -2.19 mm3 (IQR-3.65, -0.91) compared to a median volume loss of -0.37 mm3 (IQR -1.02, 0.16) in the no visible progression group (p < 0.001). Mean profile loss was -75.2 μm (IQR-93.9, -61.0) and 63.2 μm (IQR -82.5, -49.7) for the progression and no-progression groups respectively (p = 0.018). Volume loss of -1.22mm3 represented a 79 % sensitivity and 61 % specificity. The estimated area under the curve for volume loss was 0.80 (95 %CI 0.71-0.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to propose rates of high wear progression in adolescents. Limited sensitivity and specificity confirms that quantitative analysis is an adjunct tool to be used alongside history taking and clinical judgement. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The rapid advancement of digital technologies may result in improved diagnosis in erosive tooth wear (ETW). Intra-oral scans and registration software are a promising adjunct for monitoring ETW progression in clinical practice.
Authors: Victor Díaz-Flores García; Yolanda Freire; Susana David Fernández; Beatriz Tomás Murillo; Margarita Gómez Sánchez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 4.614