Cargando…

Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces

Analysis of marginal adaptation of dental adhesive interfaces using scanning electron microscopy has proven to be a powerful nondestructive method to evaluate the quality of adhesion. This methodology is, however, time-consuming and needs expensive equipment. The purpose of this study was to evaluat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Daher, René, Krejci, Ivo, di Bella, Enrico, Marger, Laurine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8747457/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35012106
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14010083
_version_ 1784630841357369344
author Daher, René
Krejci, Ivo
di Bella, Enrico
Marger, Laurine
author_facet Daher, René
Krejci, Ivo
di Bella, Enrico
Marger, Laurine
author_sort Daher, René
collection PubMed
description Analysis of marginal adaptation of dental adhesive interfaces using scanning electron microscopy has proven to be a powerful nondestructive method to evaluate the quality of adhesion. This methodology is, however, time-consuming and needs expensive equipment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the possibility and efficiency of using a digital optical microscope (DOM) to perform marginal analysis and to compare it with the scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis. Fifteen defect-free molars were selected for this study. Class V cavities were prepared and restored with resin composite, and epoxy replicas were obtained from silicone impressions of the restored teeth. Custom-made image analysis software was then used to measure the percentage of the noncontinuous margins (NCM) of each sample. To compare the DOM to the gold standard, SEM, each sample was analyzed 10 times using the DOM and three times using the SEM, by the same experienced operator. The repeatability coefficient and concordance were evaluated, and a Bland and Altman analysis was used for comparison of the two methods of measurements. To validate the DOM analysis method, an ANOVA approach (Gage R R) was used. Repeatability and reproducibility, which are two components of precision to validate the DOM analysis system, were calculated. For this, the same restorations were analyzed by two additional operators three times with the DOM. The duration of each step of the analysis using both methods was also recorded as a secondary outcome. Regarding the repeatability of each method, the Friedman test showed no statistically significant difference within the repetitions of measurements by SEM and DOM (p = 0.523 and p = 0.123, respectively). Moreover, the Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias of 0.86 and concluded no statistically significant difference between the two methods, DOM and SEM. ANOVA evaluated DOM measurement system variation including the variances of repeatability and reproducibility that represented, respectively, 0.3% and 4% of the variance components. Reproducibility or inter-operator variability represented the principal source of variability with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.024). The time required for analysis with SEM was almost double that of DOM. The use of digital optical microscopy appears to be a valid alternative to the SEM for the analysis of marginal adaptation of dental adhesive interfaces. Further studies to evaluate the effect of training of operators in digital optical microscopy could reveal higher accuracy for this method and inter-operator agreement when experience is gained.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8747457
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87474572022-01-11 Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces Daher, René Krejci, Ivo di Bella, Enrico Marger, Laurine Polymers (Basel) Article Analysis of marginal adaptation of dental adhesive interfaces using scanning electron microscopy has proven to be a powerful nondestructive method to evaluate the quality of adhesion. This methodology is, however, time-consuming and needs expensive equipment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the possibility and efficiency of using a digital optical microscope (DOM) to perform marginal analysis and to compare it with the scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis. Fifteen defect-free molars were selected for this study. Class V cavities were prepared and restored with resin composite, and epoxy replicas were obtained from silicone impressions of the restored teeth. Custom-made image analysis software was then used to measure the percentage of the noncontinuous margins (NCM) of each sample. To compare the DOM to the gold standard, SEM, each sample was analyzed 10 times using the DOM and three times using the SEM, by the same experienced operator. The repeatability coefficient and concordance were evaluated, and a Bland and Altman analysis was used for comparison of the two methods of measurements. To validate the DOM analysis method, an ANOVA approach (Gage R R) was used. Repeatability and reproducibility, which are two components of precision to validate the DOM analysis system, were calculated. For this, the same restorations were analyzed by two additional operators three times with the DOM. The duration of each step of the analysis using both methods was also recorded as a secondary outcome. Regarding the repeatability of each method, the Friedman test showed no statistically significant difference within the repetitions of measurements by SEM and DOM (p = 0.523 and p = 0.123, respectively). Moreover, the Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias of 0.86 and concluded no statistically significant difference between the two methods, DOM and SEM. ANOVA evaluated DOM measurement system variation including the variances of repeatability and reproducibility that represented, respectively, 0.3% and 4% of the variance components. Reproducibility or inter-operator variability represented the principal source of variability with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.024). The time required for analysis with SEM was almost double that of DOM. The use of digital optical microscopy appears to be a valid alternative to the SEM for the analysis of marginal adaptation of dental adhesive interfaces. Further studies to evaluate the effect of training of operators in digital optical microscopy could reveal higher accuracy for this method and inter-operator agreement when experience is gained. MDPI 2021-12-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8747457/ /pubmed/35012106 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14010083 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Daher, René
Krejci, Ivo
di Bella, Enrico
Marger, Laurine
Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces
title Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces
title_full Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces
title_fullStr Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces
title_short Evaluation of the Validity of Digital Optical Microscopy in the Assessment of Marginal Adaptation of Dental Adhesive Interfaces
title_sort evaluation of the validity of digital optical microscopy in the assessment of marginal adaptation of dental adhesive interfaces
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8747457/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35012106
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14010083
work_keys_str_mv AT daherrene evaluationofthevalidityofdigitalopticalmicroscopyintheassessmentofmarginaladaptationofdentaladhesiveinterfaces
AT krejciivo evaluationofthevalidityofdigitalopticalmicroscopyintheassessmentofmarginaladaptationofdentaladhesiveinterfaces
AT dibellaenrico evaluationofthevalidityofdigitalopticalmicroscopyintheassessmentofmarginaladaptationofdentaladhesiveinterfaces
AT margerlaurine evaluationofthevalidityofdigitalopticalmicroscopyintheassessmentofmarginaladaptationofdentaladhesiveinterfaces