ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry : JCD2014
Cut off values of laser fluorescence for different storage methods at different time intervals in comparison to frozen condition: A 1 year in vitro study.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry : JCD, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Validity in Occlusal Caries Detection of ICDAS II, DIAGNOdent, Radiography and a Combination of the Three Methods: An In Vitro Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Diagnostic validity of the use of ICDAS II and DIAGNOdent pen verified by micro-computed tomography for the detection of occlusal caries lesions-an in vitro evaluation.Lasers in medical science · 2019Article
- Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG on Remineralization Using CPP - ACPF (MI - Paste Plus) after Enamel Erosion Caused by Carbonated Soft Drink in Primary Teeth: In-Vitro Study.Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences · 2019Article
- Diagnostic validity of ICDAS and DIAGNOdent combined: an in vitro study in pre-cavitated lesions.Lasers in medical science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim of the following study is to evaluate the change in laser fluorescence (LF) values for extracted teeth stored in different solutions over 1 year period, to give cut-off values for different storage media at different time intervals to get them at par with the in vivo conditions and to see which medium gives best results with the least change in LF values and while enhancing the validity of DIAGNOdent in research. MATERIALS AND
methodsNinety extracted teeth selected, from a pool of frozen teeth, were divided into nine groups of 10 each. Specimens in Groups 1-8 were stored in 1% chloramine, 10% formalin, 10% buffered formalin, 0.02% thymol, 0.12% chlorhexidine, 3% sodium hypochlorite, a commercially available saliva substitute-Wet Mouth (ICPA Pharmaceuticals) and normal saline respectively at 4°C. The last group was stored under frozen condition at -20°C without contact with any storage solution. DIAGNOdent was used to measure the change the LF values at day 30, 45, 60, 160 and 365. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The mean change in LF values in different storage mediums at different time intervals were compared using two-way ANOVA.
resultsAt the end of 1 year, significant decrease in fluorescence (P < 0.05) was observed in Groups 1-8. Maximum drop in LF values occurred between day 1 and 30. Group 9 (frozen specimens) did not significantly change their fluorescence response.
conclusionsAn inevitable change in LF takes place due to various storage media commonly used in dental research at different time intervals. The values obtained from our study can remove the bias caused by the storage media and the values of LF thus obtained can hence be conveniently extrapolated to the in vivo condition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.