Pulpal responses evaluated by two assessment systems: Use of Nobetec as negative and Super-Syntrex as positive control materials
In the assessment of pulpal responses to dental materials there is no general agreement regarding which system should be used in the selection of histologic sections for assessment and which negative and positive control materials should be used. The present study is an evaluation, on 227 sections,...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology oral medicine, oral pathology, 1983-09, Vol.56 (3), p.310-316 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 316 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 310 |
| container_title | Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology |
| container_volume | 56 |
| creator | Cleaton-Jones, P. Austin, J.C. Fatti, L.P. Valcke, C.F. McInnes-Ledoux, P.M. |
| description | In the assessment of pulpal responses to dental materials there is no general agreement regarding which system should be used in the selection of histologic sections for assessment and which negative and positive control materials should be used. The present study is an evaluation, on 227 sections, of two pulpal assessment systems and three section-selection methods using a negative (zinc oxide and eugenol cement) and a positive (silicate) control material. The results indicate that, depending on which system is used, considerable variation in response can be noted. Better standardization of methods is necessary. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/0030-4220(83)90014-2 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80732297</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>0030422083900142</els_id><sourcerecordid>80732297</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-e176t-9939367757ce5f98a438552b949019ee417f9145cb177d7e2e41014de4f5db693</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9UU1v1TAQtCpQ-1r4B0XyCdFDwJ9xzAEJVf1AqgCp9Gw5yQa5SuLgdR68Gz8dv_aJ02hnRrurGULOOXvPGa8_MCZZpYRg7xp5YRnjqhJHZMMb01SCG_2CbP5bTsgp4mMZjarlMTmuFde6Vhvy9_s6Ln6kCXCJMwJS2Ppx9Rl62u5o_h2px0LjBHOmuMMME36kDwg0DvRrbCFDVyx0hp8-hy1QP_f0fl0gVfe7OSf4s1eXiOFJ7WLh4kinciEFP-Ir8nIoAK8PeEYerq9-XN5Wd99uvlx-vquAmzpX1kora2O06UAPtvFKNlqL1irLuAVQ3AyWK9213JjegChMSaQHNei-ra08I2-f9y4p_loBs5sCdjCOfoa4omuYkUJYU4xvDsa1naB3SwqTTzt3iKzon551KN9uAySHXYC5gz4k6LLrY3CcuX1Fbp-_2-fvGumeKnJC_gPXTYOg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>80732297</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Pulpal responses evaluated by two assessment systems: Use of Nobetec as negative and Super-Syntrex as positive control materials</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Cleaton-Jones, P. ; Austin, J.C. ; Fatti, L.P. ; Valcke, C.F. ; McInnes-Ledoux, P.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Cleaton-Jones, P. ; Austin, J.C. ; Fatti, L.P. ; Valcke, C.F. ; McInnes-Ledoux, P.M.</creatorcontrib><description>In the assessment of pulpal responses to dental materials there is no general agreement regarding which system should be used in the selection of histologic sections for assessment and which negative and positive control materials should be used. The present study is an evaluation, on 227 sections, of two pulpal assessment systems and three section-selection methods using a negative (zinc oxide and eugenol cement) and a positive (silicate) control material. The results indicate that, depending on which system is used, considerable variation in response can be noted. Better standardization of methods is necessary.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0030-4220</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-2175</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(83)90014-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 6415564</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Animals ; Dental Pulp - drug effects ; Dentin - anatomy & histology ; Dentin - pathology ; Dentin, Secondary - anatomy & histology ; Dentistry ; Evaluation Studies as Topic ; Haplorhini ; Silicate Cement - pharmacology ; Time Factors ; Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement - pharmacology</subject><ispartof>Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, 1983-09, Vol.56 (3), p.310-316</ispartof><rights>1983</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6415564$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cleaton-Jones, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Austin, J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fatti, L.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valcke, C.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McInnes-Ledoux, P.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Pulpal responses evaluated by two assessment systems: Use of Nobetec as negative and Super-Syntrex as positive control materials</title><title>Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology</title><addtitle>Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol</addtitle><description>In the assessment of pulpal responses to dental materials there is no general agreement regarding which system should be used in the selection of histologic sections for assessment and which negative and positive control materials should be used. The present study is an evaluation, on 227 sections, of two pulpal assessment systems and three section-selection methods using a negative (zinc oxide and eugenol cement) and a positive (silicate) control material. The results indicate that, depending on which system is used, considerable variation in response can be noted. Better standardization of methods is necessary.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Dental Pulp - drug effects</subject><subject>Dentin - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Dentin - pathology</subject><subject>Dentin, Secondary - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Evaluation Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Haplorhini</subject><subject>Silicate Cement - pharmacology</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement - pharmacology</subject><issn>0030-4220</issn><issn>1878-2175</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1983</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9UU1v1TAQtCpQ-1r4B0XyCdFDwJ9xzAEJVf1AqgCp9Gw5yQa5SuLgdR68Gz8dv_aJ02hnRrurGULOOXvPGa8_MCZZpYRg7xp5YRnjqhJHZMMb01SCG_2CbP5bTsgp4mMZjarlMTmuFde6Vhvy9_s6Ln6kCXCJMwJS2Ppx9Rl62u5o_h2px0LjBHOmuMMME36kDwg0DvRrbCFDVyx0hp8-hy1QP_f0fl0gVfe7OSf4s1eXiOFJ7WLh4kinciEFP-Ir8nIoAK8PeEYerq9-XN5Wd99uvlx-vquAmzpX1kora2O06UAPtvFKNlqL1irLuAVQ3AyWK9213JjegChMSaQHNei-ra08I2-f9y4p_loBs5sCdjCOfoa4omuYkUJYU4xvDsa1naB3SwqTTzt3iKzon551KN9uAySHXYC5gz4k6LLrY3CcuX1Fbp-_2-fvGumeKnJC_gPXTYOg</recordid><startdate>198309</startdate><enddate>198309</enddate><creator>Cleaton-Jones, P.</creator><creator>Austin, J.C.</creator><creator>Fatti, L.P.</creator><creator>Valcke, C.F.</creator><creator>McInnes-Ledoux, P.M.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198309</creationdate><title>Pulpal responses evaluated by two assessment systems: Use of Nobetec as negative and Super-Syntrex as positive control materials</title><author>Cleaton-Jones, P. ; Austin, J.C. ; Fatti, L.P. ; Valcke, C.F. ; McInnes-Ledoux, P.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-e176t-9939367757ce5f98a438552b949019ee417f9145cb177d7e2e41014de4f5db693</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1983</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Dental Pulp - drug effects</topic><topic>Dentin - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Dentin - pathology</topic><topic>Dentin, Secondary - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Evaluation Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Haplorhini</topic><topic>Silicate Cement - pharmacology</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement - pharmacology</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cleaton-Jones, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Austin, J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fatti, L.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valcke, C.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McInnes-Ledoux, P.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cleaton-Jones, P.</au><au>Austin, J.C.</au><au>Fatti, L.P.</au><au>Valcke, C.F.</au><au>McInnes-Ledoux, P.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Pulpal responses evaluated by two assessment systems: Use of Nobetec as negative and Super-Syntrex as positive control materials</atitle><jtitle>Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology</jtitle><addtitle>Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol</addtitle><date>1983-09</date><risdate>1983</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>310</spage><epage>316</epage><pages>310-316</pages><issn>0030-4220</issn><eissn>1878-2175</eissn><abstract>In the assessment of pulpal responses to dental materials there is no general agreement regarding which system should be used in the selection of histologic sections for assessment and which negative and positive control materials should be used. The present study is an evaluation, on 227 sections, of two pulpal assessment systems and three section-selection methods using a negative (zinc oxide and eugenol cement) and a positive (silicate) control material. The results indicate that, depending on which system is used, considerable variation in response can be noted. Better standardization of methods is necessary.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>6415564</pmid><doi>10.1016/0030-4220(83)90014-2</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0030-4220 |
| ispartof | Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, 1983-09, Vol.56 (3), p.310-316 |
| issn | 0030-4220 1878-2175 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80732297 |
| source | MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Animals Dental Pulp - drug effects Dentin - anatomy & histology Dentin - pathology Dentin, Secondary - anatomy & histology Dentistry Evaluation Studies as Topic Haplorhini Silicate Cement - pharmacology Time Factors Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement - pharmacology |
| title | Pulpal responses evaluated by two assessment systems: Use of Nobetec as negative and Super-Syntrex as positive control materials |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T04%3A22%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Pulpal%20responses%20evaluated%20by%20two%20assessment%20systems:%20Use%20of%20Nobetec%20as%20negative%20and%20Super-Syntrex%20as%20positive%20control%20materials&rft.jtitle=Oral%20surgery,%20oral%20medicine,%20oral%20pathology&rft.au=Cleaton-Jones,%20P.&rft.date=1983-09&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=310&rft.epage=316&rft.pages=310-316&rft.issn=0030-4220&rft.eissn=1878-2175&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0030-4220(83)90014-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E80732297%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=80732297&rft_id=info:pmid/6415564&rft_els_id=0030422083900142&rfr_iscdi=true |