نمایش پرونده ساده آیتم

dc.contributor.authorVosoughhosseini, S|| Lotfi, M|| Moradzadeh, M|| Aghbali, A|| Rahimi, S|| Saghiri, M|| Zand, V|| Mehdipour, M|| Ranjkesh, B|| Doosti, S
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-26T08:06:09Z
dc.date.available2018-08-26T08:06:09Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier10.4317/medoral.17309
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.tbzmed.ac.ir:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/49967
dc.description.abstractObjectives: One of the most important factors for suitable materials for pulp therapy is biocompatibility. Two histopathologic methods of Cox and Federation Dentaire International (FDI) were used to evaluate inflammation. In Cox method, density of inflammatory cells, tissue reactions like fibrosis, vascular responses like congestion and fibrin extravasation have been used to evaluate inflammatory reactions. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of pathologists' interpretations using two different methods. Study design: Three pathologists observed the degree of inflammation in 225 histopathologic sections. These sections showed inflammation in subcutaneous connective tissue of rats adjacent to polyethylene tubes, filled with white or gray mineral trioxide aggregate. Empty tubes served as controls. Samples were harvested after 7-, 15-, 30-, 60-, and 90-days. All pathologists examined the sections under a light microscope (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany) at x400 magnifications. Chi-Square test was used to evaluate the difference between inflammation grades when one pathologist used two methods. Cohen's Kappa value was used to measure agreement of three pathologists to recognize the degrees of inflammations when using one of the methods. Results: There were no significant differences between the two methods when one of the pathologist used these methods to report the degree of inflammation (p=0.054). However, two other pathologists reported significant differences between two methods (p=0.005, p=0.001). In the FDI method, there was an acceptable agreement between first and second, and first and third pathologist in terms of the degree of inflammation, and intermediate agreement existed between the second and third pathologist. With the Cox method, no agreement among the pathologists could be found. Conclusion: The results of three pathologists in terms of rating inflammation with the FDI method showed better agreement than with the Cox method. Therefore, FDI method is more reliable than the Cox method to evaluate inflammation.
dc.language.isoEnglish
dc.relation.ispartofMEDICINA ORAL PATOLOGIA ORAL Y CIRUGIA BUCAL
dc.subjectBiocompatibility|| connective tissue|| inflammation|| mineral trioxide aggregate
dc.titleComparison of two histopathologic methods for evaluating subcutaneous reaction to mineral trioxide aggregate
dc.typeArticle
dc.citation.volume17
dc.citation.issue1
dc.citation.spageE41
dc.citation.epageE44
dc.citation.indexWeb of science
dc.identifier.DOIdoi: 10.4317/medoral.17309


فایلهای درون آیتم

Thumbnail

این آیتم در مجموعه های زیر مشاهده می شود

نمایش پرونده ساده آیتم