title: Comparison of two different methods of detecting residual caries.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to investigate the ability of the fluorescence-aided caries excavation (FACE) device to detect residual caries by comparing conventional methodsin vivo.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 301 females and 202 males with carious teeth participated in this study. The cavity preparations were done by grade 4 (Group 1, 154 teeth), grade 5 (Group 2, 176 teeth), and postgraduate (Group 3, 173 teeth) students. After caries excavation using a handpiece and hand instruments, the presence of residual caries was evaluated by 2 investigators who were previously calibrated for visual-tactile assessment with and without magnifying glasses and trained in the use of a FACE device. The tooth number, cavity type, and presence or absence of residual caries were recorded. The data were analyzed using the Chi-square test, the Fisher's Exact test, or the McNemar test as appropriate. Kappa statistics was used for calibration. In all tests, the level of significance was set atp= 0.05.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Almost half of the cavities prepared were Class II (Class I, 20.9%; Class II, 48.9%; Class III, 20.1%; Class IV, 3.4%; Class V, 6.8%). Higher numbers of cavities left with caries were observed in Groups 1 and 2 than in Group 3 for all examination methods. Significant differences were found between visual inspection with or without magnifying glasses and inspection with a FACE device for all groups (p< 0.001). More residual caries were detected through inspection with a FACE device (46.5%) than through either visual inspection (31.8%) or inspection with a magnifying glass (37.6%).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Within the limitations of this study, the FACE device may be an effective method for the detection of residual caries.
authors.affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sıhhıye, Ankara, Turkey.
authors.forename: Uzay
authors.identifier: 0000-0002-8764-2174
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Koç Vural
authors.affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sıhhıye, Ankara, Turkey.
authors.forename: Zeynep Bilge
authors.initials: ZB
authors.lastname: Kütük
authors.affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sıhhıye, Ankara, Turkey.
authors.forename: Esra
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Ergin
authors.affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sıhhıye, Ankara, Turkey.
authors.forename: Filiz
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Yalçın Çakır
authors.affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sıhhıye, Ankara, Turkey.
authors.forename: Sevil
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Gürgan
keywords: Detection of residual caries; Fluorescence-aided caries excavation; Magnifying glass; Visual inspection; Visual-tactile examination