Validity of Fluorescence-Based Devices Versus Visual-Tactile Method in Detection of Secondary Caries Around Resin Composite Restorations: Invivo Diagnostic Accuracy Study
Status
Conditions
Treatments
Details and patient eligibility
About
This study will be conducted to evaluate the clinical performance and validity of both light-induced fluorescence intraoral camera and laser-induced fluorescence device in comparison to visual-tactile assessment method in detection of secondary caries around margins of resin composite restorations.
Full description
Each patient should have at least one resin composite restoration. The restoration will be evaluated by all diagnostic methods. Each examiner will independently record the dental findings using all methods, the visual- tactile assessment method and both fluorescent-aided identification methods. The visual-tactile assessment method includes the use of mirror, probe under good illumination condition, while the fluorescent-aided identification methods will be performed by both light-induced fluorescence intraoral camera and laser-induced fluorescence device. Then Diagnostic performance for caries detection was evaluated, assessing the validity of each diagnostic method in diagnosing secondary caries around margins of resin composite restorations
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
- Patients should be over 18 years of age.
- Patients should have an acceptable oral hygiene level.
- Patients should have at least one resin composite restoration.
Exclusion criteria
- Patients with a compromised medical history.
- Patients with active severe periodontal disease.
Trial design
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
30 participants in 3 patient groups
Trial contacts and locations
Loading...
Central trial contact
Shereen Hafez Ibrahim, Associate Professor (PhD); Aya Mohamed Adly Ibrahim, Master's Degree
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal