This study evaluated dental caries detection ability between the Qraycam and Qraypen on the same dental caries lesions. A total of 178teeth from 61patients were imaged using Qraypen C®(QC) and Qraycam Pro®(QP) devices and evaluated using analysis software (QA2). Occlusal, secondary, and proximal dental caries were evaluated and scored according to International Caries Detection and Assessment System(ICDAS II) and X-ray criteria. Bland-Altman plots were used to compare quantitative light-induced fluorescence(QLF) parameters obtained from the different QLF devices. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve(AUROC) were calculated. The ΔFaver. of the QLF-parameters showed that the mean difference between the two different QLF devices was close to zero and that the ± 5 error value was included in the mean ± 1.96SD range for the detection of dental caries. The accuracies for diagnosing occlusal dental caries were 0.83-0.96 and 0.81-0.82 and the accuracies for diagnosing proximal dental caries were 0.52-0.62 and 0.52-0.71 for the QC and QP devices, respectively. In conclusion, the ΔFaver. obtained from the QP showed diagnostic value mainly for screening of demineralized teeth. For teeth selected through screening, the depth of the lesion must be precisely evaluated using additional QP and radiographic imaging.
© 2022. The Author(s).