| Literature DB >> 34940726 |
Yuchen Zheng1, Min-Hee Oh2, Woo-Sub Song3, Ki-Hyun Kim3, In-Hee Shin3, Min-Seok Kim4, Jin-Hyoung Cho2.
Abstract
Enamel cracks generated in the anterior teeth not only affect the function but also the aesthetics of the teeth. Chair-side tooth enamel crack detection is essential for clinicians to formulate treatment plans and prevent related dental disease. This study aimed to develop a dental imaging system using a near-IR light source to detect enamel cracks and to investigate the relationship between anterior enamel cracks and age in vivo. A total of 68 subjects were divided into three groups according to their age: young, middle, and elderly. Near-infrared radiation of 850 nm was used to identify enamel cracks in anterior teeth. The results of the quantitative examination showed that the number of enamel cracks on the teeth increased considerably with age. For the qualitative examination, the results indicated that there was no significant relationship between the severity of the enamel cracks and age. So, it can be concluded that the prevalence of anterior cracked tooth increased significantly with age in the young and middle age. The length of the anterior enamel cracks tended to increase with age too; however, this result was not significant. The silicon charge-coupled device (CCD) with a wavelength of 850 nm has a good performance in the detection of enamel cracks and has very good clinical practicability.Entities:
Keywords: aging; cracked-tooth syndrome; dentistry imaging; enamel crack; near-infrared ray; transmission
Year: 2021 PMID: 34940726 PMCID: PMC8703581 DOI: 10.3390/jimaging7120259
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Imaging ISSN: 2313-433X
Figure 1Device and method of detection. (a) Rubber tray, which could emit 850 nm Near-IR in the mouth to highlight the cracks. Red arrows indicate the LED illuminant, whose brightness can be adjusted from level 1 to 5, with 5 being the brightest. (b) Near-infrared dental and periodontal imaging device with a screen on the examiner’s side for image capturing and a CCD camera inside for image acquiring. Red arrow indicates a control lever, which is connected to the camera to adjust its direction during the detection process. (c) Schematic diagram of the patient position during detection.
Figure 2The three most representative types of teeth in the three age groups. The red arrow points out the enamel cracks. The high contrast of the enamel cracks in the near-infrared image can be clearly seen.
Figure 3Simulated images, intraoral photos, and 850 nm Near-IR images for indicating the differences among the classifications. Red arrows indicate the cracks. (a) A simulated Class 1 central incisor crack. (b) An intraoral photo of a Class 1 crack on the maxillary central incisor under natural light. (c) The image of the tooth in Figure 3b under Near-IR. (d) A simulated Class 2 central incisor crack. (e) The intraoral photo of a Class 2 crack on the maxillary central incisor under natural light. (f) The image of the tooth in Figure 3e under Near-IR. (g) A simulated Class 3 central incisor crack. (h) An intraoral photo of a Class 3 crack on the maxillary central incisor under natural light. (i) The image of the tooth in Figure 3h under Near-IR.
Distribution of the enamel cracks in different types of teeth among different age groups.
| Young | Middle | Elderly | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maxilla | Central incisor | 14 (4.8%) | 29 (10.0%) | 65 (22.3%) | 108 |
| Lateral incisor | 1 (0.3%) | 8 (2.7%) | 11 (3.8%) | 20 | |
| Canine | 4 (1.4%) | 6 (2.0%) | 21 (7.2%) | 31 | |
| Mandible | Central incisor | 7 (2.4%) | 33 (11.3%) | 41 (14%) | 81 |
| Lateral incisor | 3 (1.0%) | 4 (1.4%) | 28 (9.6%) | 35 | |
| Canine | 2 (0.7%) | 1 (0.3%) | 13 (4.5%) | 16 | |
| Total | 31 | 81 | 179 | 291 | |
Figure 4The distribution of different tooth types and tooth classifications among the three groups. (a) Tooth type distribution. The value of the ordinate indicates the number of cracked teeth. (b) Enamel crack classification distribution. The value of the ordinate indicates the number of different classes of cracks.
Multivariate logistic regression result of qualitative analysis among three age groups.
| Group | Middle | Elderly | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sig 1 | OR 2 | CI 3 | Sig | OR | CI | ||
| Young | Type I | 0.028 | 1.848 | 1.07 to 3.19 | 0 | 3.976 | 2.35 to 6.72 |
| Type II | 0.006 | 7.969 | 1.8 to 35.27 | 0 | 18.29 | 4.26 to 78.57 | |
| Type III | 0.197 | 4.25 | 0.47 to 38.34 | 0.001 | 32.007 | 4.26 to 240.55 | |
| Type I | - | - | - | 0.001 | 2.152 | 1.37 to 3.38 | |
| Middle | Type II | - | - | - | 0.016 | 2.295 | 1.16 to 4.53 |
| Type III | - | - | - | 0.000 | 7.531 | 2.53 to 22.40 | |
1 Sig, significance. Significance analysis from multivariate logistic regression, p < 0.05. 2 OR, odds ratio. 3 CI, confidence interval, 95%.
Multivariate logistic regression results of qualitative analysis of the crack class.
| Group | Sig 1 | OR 2 | CI 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Middle | Class 1 | 0.864 | 0.936 | 0.44 to 1.99 |
| Class 2 | 0.471 | 1.366 | 0.58 to 3.19 | |
| Class 3 | 0.542 | 1.41 | 0.47 to 4.26 | |
| Elderly | Class 1 | 0.198 | 1.563 | 0.97 to 3.09 |
| Class 2 | 0.602 | 1.238 | 0.55 to 2.77 | |
| Class 3 | 0.539 | 1.387 | 0.49 to 3.94 |
1 Sig, significance. Significance analysis from multivariate logistic regression, p < 0.05. 2 OR, odds ratio. 3 CI, confidence interval, 95%.