Advertisement

Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence

  • Baek-II KimEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Quantitative Light Induced fluorescence (QLF) distinguishes between an initial caries lesion and sound teeth by assessing fluorescence loss. Visible blue light irradiating the teeth and reaching the dentinoenamel junction (DEJ) induces fluorescence. This mechanism results in light scatters inside a white spot 5–10 times more than that in normal enamel, thus the lesion appears darker than sound enamel. The fluorescence loss detected by QLF can be visualized as an image, and with specialized software it is possible to nondestructively quantify the physical characteristics of caries lesions as numerical values. Previous studies have found that ΔF, one of the QLF parameters is strongly correlated with lesion depth. The systems is also able to assess [AZ1] red fluorescence, which reflects bacterial activity calculated by delta R (ΔR, in %).

Keywords

Dental plaque Dental caries Fluorescence Optical diagnosis Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) 

References

  1. 1.
    Pretty IA. Caries detection and diagnosis: novel technologies. J Dent. 2006;34(10):727–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bjelkhagen H, Sundstrom F, Angmar-Mansson B, Ryden H. Early detection of enamel caries by the luminescence excited by visible laser light. Swed Dent J. 1982;6(1):1–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Veen MH, de Josselin de Jong E. Application of quantitative light-induced fluorescence for assessing early caries lesions. Monogr Oral Sci. 2000;17:144–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shi XQ, Tranaeus S, Angmar-Mansson B. Comparison of QLF and DIAGNOdent for quantification of smooth surface caries. Caries Res. 2001;35(1):21–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim YS, Kang SM, Lee ES, Lee JH, Kim BR, Kim BI. Ecological changes in oral microcosm biofilm during maturation. J Biomed Opt. 2016;21(10):101409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lee ES, Kang SM, Ko HY, Kwon HK, Kim BI. Association between the cariogenicity of a dental microcosm biofilm and its red fluorescence detected by Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence-Digital (QLF-D). J Dent. 2013;41(12):1264–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim YS, Lee ES, Kwon HK, Kim BI. Monitoring the maturation process of a dental microcosm biofilm using the Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence-Digital (QLF-D). J Dent. 2014;42(6):691–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Han SY, Kim BR, Ko HY, Kwon HK, Kim BI. Assessing the use of Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence-Digital as a clinical plaque assessment. Photodiagn Photodyn Ther. 2016;13:34–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Volgenant CMC, Fernandez YMM, Rosema NAM, van der Weijden FA, Ten Cate JM, van der Veen MH. Comparison of red autofluorescing plaque and disclosed plaque—a cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(9):2551–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Han SY, Kim BR, Ko HY, Kwon HK, Kim BI. Validity and reliability of autofluorescence-based quantification method of dental plaque. Photodiagn Photodyn Ther. 2015;12(4):587–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller CC, Burnside G, Higham SM, Flannigan NL. Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence-Digital as an oral hygiene evaluation tool to assess plaque accumulation and enamel demineralization in orthodontics. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(6):991–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferreira Zandona A, Santiago E, Eckert G, Fontana M, Ando M, Zero DT. Use of ICDAS combined with quantitative light-induced fluorescence as a caries detection method. Caries Res. 2010;44(3):317–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alammari MR, Smith PW, de Josselin de Jong E, Higham SM. Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF): a tool for early occlusal dental caries detection and supporting decision making in vivo. J Dent. 2013;41(2):127–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Felix Gomez G, Eckert GJ, Ferreira Zandona A. Orange/red fluorescence of active caries by retrospective quantitative light-induced fluorescence image analysis. Caries Res. 2016;50(3):295–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Claus EB, Calvocoressi L, Bondy ML, Schildkraut JM, Wiemels JL, Wrensch M. Dental x-rays and risk of meningioma. Cancer. 2012;118(18):4530–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pretty IA, Edgar WM, Higham SM. Detection of in vitro demineralization of primary teeth using quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF). Int J Paediatr Dent. 2002;12(3):158–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ko HY, Kang SM, Kim HE, Kwon HK, Kim BI. Validation of quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital (QLF-D) for the detection of approximal caries in vitro. J Dent. 2015;43(5):568–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim ES, Lee ES, Kang SM, Jung EH, de Josselin de Jong E, Jung HI, Kim BI. A new screening method to detect proximal dental caries using fluorescence imaging. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2017;20:257–62.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ferreira Zandona A, Ando M, Gomez GF, Garcia-Corretjer M, Eckert GJ, Santiago E, et al. Longitudinal analyses of early lesions by fluorescence: an observational study. J Dent Res. 2013;92(Suppl 7):84s–9s.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim HE, Kwon HK, Kim BI. Recovery percentage of remineralization according to severity of early caries. Am J Dent. 2013;26(3):132–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim HE, Kim BI. Analysis of orange/red fluorescence for bacterial activity in initial carious lesions may provide accurate lesion activity assessment for caries progression. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2017;17(2):125–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim BR, Kang SM, Kwon HK, Kim BI. In vitro assessment of quantitative light-induced red fluorescence related to activity of caries lesions [abstract]. Caries Res. 2017;51(4):344.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pretty IA, Ingram GS, Agalamanyi EA, Edgar WM, Higham SM. The use of fluorescein-enhanced quantitative light-induced fluorescence to monitor de- and re-mineralization of in vitro root caries. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;30(12):1151–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Durmusoglu O, Tagtekin DA, Yanikoglu F. Clinical evaluation of demineralization and remineralization of intact root surface lesions in the clinic by a quantitative light-induced fluorescence system. Lasers Med Sci. 2012;27(2):397–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim BR, Kang SM, Kim GM, Kim BI. Differences in the intensity of light-induced fluorescence emitted by resin composites. Photodiagn Photodyn Ther. 2016;13:114–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ando M, Gonzalez-Cabezas C, Isaacs RL, Eckert GJ, Stookey GK. Evaluation of several techniques for the detection of secondary caries adjacent to amalgam restorations. Caries Res. 2004;38(4):350–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diniz MB, Eckert GJ, Gonzalez-Cabezas C, Cordeiro Rde C, Ferreira-Zandona AG. Caries detection around restorations using ICDAS and optical devices. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2016;28(2):110–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fontana M, Platt JA, Eckert GJ, Gonzalez-Cabezas C, Yoder K, Zero DT, et al. Monitoring of sound and carious surfaces under sealants over 44 months. J Dent Res. 2014;93(11):1070–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Preventive Dentistry and Public Oral HealthYonsei University College of DentistrySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations