PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 11, 2026THE JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN ACADEMY OF PEDTATRIC DENTISTRY0 citationsOpen Access

Performance Assessment of Smartooth, a Novel Laser-Based Caries Detection Device, Compared with Conventional Methods in Primary Molars: An Ex Vivo Study

JPJin Ah ParkJSJe Seon SongKLKo Eun Lee

Key Points

  • The aim is to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of the Smartooth device and the DIAGNOdent pen in detecting dental caries in primary molars using a gold standard method.
  • Ex vivo evaluation of 79 extracted primary molars
  • Comparison of caries detection methods: visual examination, LF pen, and Smartooth
  • Determination of optimal cut-off values using receiver operating characteristic curves and Youden’s index
  • Assessment of specificity and sensitivity for occlusal and smooth surfaces
  • Smartooth showed higher specificity for occlusal surfaces compared to LF pen
  • LF pen exhibited higher accuracy for occlusal caries detection
  • Sensitivity of Smartooth was highest for D1 enamel caries
  • Visual examination provided the highest specificity and accuracy for D2 dentin caries
  • All optimal cut-off values were lower than manufacturers' recommendations

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of DIAGNOdent pen (LF pen) and Smartooth (SM) in detecting occlusal and smooth surface caries in extracted primary molars. The device-specific optimal cut-off values were determined, and their clinical applicability was assessed using microcomputed tomography (micro-CT) as the gold standard. Overall, 79 extracted primary molars were evaluated ex vivo. The caries-detection methods included visual examination, LF pen, and SM. The optimal cut-off values were calculated from the receiver operating characteristic curves using Youden’s index; diagnostic performance was also measured. For occlusal surfaces, SM showed higher specificity than the LF pen, whereas the LF pen showed higher accuracy; for enamel caries (D1), SM also had the highest sensitivity and Az. For smooth surfaces, the LF pen showed the highest sensitivity for D1, while sensitivity did not differ significantly for dentin caries (D2); specificity and accuracy for D2 were highest for visual examination, with the LF pen exceeding SM in accuracy. SM showed high Az for D1; agreement varied by surface and depth and was lower than visual examination for occlusal D1. All optimal cut-off values were lower than the manufacturer’s recommendations. Furthermore, LF pen and SM provide specificity and sensitivity, respectively, and may be selectively used based on the lesion and diagnostic objective. These device-specific tendencies are surface- and depth-specific and are hypothesis-generating rather than establishing clinical roles; clinical utility will require prospective in vivo pediatric validation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Park et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698c1c73267fb587c655ef30https://doi.org/10.5933/jkapd.2026.53.1.38
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper