Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Research
  • Published:

Validity of Soprolife camera and Calcivis device in caries lesion activity assessment

Abstract

Aim An ex vivo study was performed to assess (gold standard [GS]: Nyvad criteria) sensitivities (SEs) and specificities (SPs) of Soprolife (fluorescence) and Calcivis (bioluminescence) - indicated, by the manufacturers, for activity assessment of coronal carious lesions (AACCL). We also calculated the positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative log-likelihoods, inter-examiner and intra-examiner variations, and concordance rates (CRs) of both devices compared to GS and to each other.

Materials and methods One hundred and twenty-one extracted posterior teeth were included. Within 48 hours after extraction, ICDAS and Nyvad scores were determined and occlusal photographs (Soprolife and Calcivis captures) were taken. Three examiners were asked to score, independently, twice (T0; T0 + 15 days), the caries activity status (active/inactive) for each image.

Results Both devices showed modest SEs and SPs. The only statistically significant differences between devices were for SE (p = 0.04) in favour of Soprolife (all ICDAS scores combined) and for SP (p = 0.03) in favour of Calcivis (ICDAS 3, 4). There were higher CRs for Soprolife than for Calcivis (compared to GS). Intra- and inter-examiner variations were 76-86.8% and 71.9-85.1% for Soprolife, and 79.3-89.3% and 72.7-86.8% for Calcivis, respectively.

Conclusion In light of the results, it seems difficult to confirm the validation of Soprolife and Calcivis for AACCL.

Key points

  • Caries activity assessment is one of the components of caries diagnosis at the lesion level; it allows better definition of the appropriate management option lesion by lesion.

  • Manufacturers and researchers are working together on the development of tools/devices to simplify the activity assessment of coronal carious lesions at the dental chair; the latest are based on fluorescence (for example, Soprolife) and bioluminescence (Calcivis).

  • Validation studies are needed to confirm the interest of the newly developed tools/devices.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Drancourt N, Roger-Leroi V, Martignon S, Jablonski-Momeni A, Pitts N, Doméjean S. Carious lesion activity assessment in clinical practice: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig 2019; 23: 1513-1524.

  2. Richards W. Carious activity assessment in clinical practice. Evid Based Dent 2019; 20: 39.

  3. Nyvad B, Machiulskiene V, Baelum V. Reliability of a new caries diagnostic system differentiating between active and inactive caries lesions. Caries Res 1999; 33: 252-260.

  4. Ekstrand K R, Martignon S, Ricketts D J, Qvist V. Detection and activity assessment of primary coronal caries lesions: a methodologic study. Oper Dent 2007; 32: 225-235.

  5. Pitts N, Ismail A I, Martignon S, Ekstrand K, Douglas G V A, Longbottom C. ICCMS guide for practitioners and educators. 2014. Available at (accessed April 2020).

  6. Terrer E, Koubi S, Dionne A et al. A new concept in restorative dentistry: light-induced fluorescence evaluator for diagnosis and treatment. Part 1: Diagnosis and treatment of initial occlusal caries. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009; 10: E086-94.

  7. Terrer E, Raskin A, Koubi S et al. A new concept in restorative dentistry: LIFEDTlightinduced fluorescence evaluator for diagnosis and treatment: part 2 - treatment of dentinal caries. J Contemp Dent Pract 2010; 11: E095-102.

  8. Doméjean S, Rongier J, Muller Bolla M. Detection of occlusal carious lesion using the SoproLife camera: a systematic review. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016; 17: 774-779.

  9. Jablonski-Momeni A, Moos J, Sakhaei Manesh V, Stoll R. Diagnostic accuracy of a bioluminescence system for the assessment of caries activity on occlusal surfaces. Caries Res 2018; 52: 279-287.

  10. Nunnally J C, Bernstein I H. Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.

  11. King T S, Chinchilli V M. A generalized concordance correlation coefficient for continuous and categorical data. Stat Med 2001; 20: 2131-2147.

  12. Bland J M, Altman D G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-310.

  13. Terwee C B, Bot S D, de Boer M R et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60: 34-42.

  14. Nyvad B, Baelum V. Nyvad criteria for caries lesion activity and severity assessment: a validated approach for clinical management and research. Caries Res 2018; 52: 397-405.

  15. Schwendicke F, Frencken J E, Bjorndal L et al. Managing carious lesions: consensus recommendations on carious tissue removal. Adv Dent Res 2016; 28: 58-67.

  16. NICE. Dental recall: Recall interval between routine dental examinations. 2004. Available at (accessed October 2020).

  17. Pepe M, Longton G, Janes H. Estimation and comparison of receiver operating characteristic curves. Stata J 2009; 9: 1.

  18. Lieli R P, Hsu Y C. Using the area under an estimated ROC curve to test the adequacy of binary predictors. J Nonparametr Stat 2019; 31: 100-130.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Céline Lambert for statistical support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sophie Domejean.

Ethics declarations

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Drancourt, N., Roger-Leroi, V., Pereira, B. et al. Validity of Soprolife camera and Calcivis device in caries lesion activity assessment. Br Dent J (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-020-2316-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-020-2316-x

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links