Cargando…

Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam

INTRODUCTION: Hard tissues can be studied by either decalcification or by preparing ground sections. Various mounting media have been tried and used for ground sections of teeth. However, there are very few studies on the use of cyanoacrylate adhesive as a mounting medium. AIMS: The aim of our study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vangala, Manogna RL, Rudraraju, Amrutha, Subramanyam, RV
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4860929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27194857
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-029X.180911
_version_ 1782431143829700608
author Vangala, Manogna RL
Rudraraju, Amrutha
Subramanyam, RV
author_facet Vangala, Manogna RL
Rudraraju, Amrutha
Subramanyam, RV
author_sort Vangala, Manogna RL
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Hard tissues can be studied by either decalcification or by preparing ground sections. Various mounting media have been tried and used for ground sections of teeth. However, there are very few studies on the use of cyanoacrylate adhesive as a mounting medium. AIMS: The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of cyanoacrylate adhesive (Fevikwik™) as a mounting medium for ground sections of teeth and to compare these ground sections with those mounted with Canada balsam. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ground sections were prepared from twenty extracted teeth. Each section was divided into two halves and mounted on one slide, one with cyanoacrylate adhesive (Fevikwik™) and the other with Canada balsam. Scoring for various features in the ground sections was done by two independent observers. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Statistical analysis using Student's t-test (unpaired) of average scores was performed for each feature observed. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the two for most of the features. However, cyanoacrylate was found to be better than Canada balsam for observing striae of Retzius (P < 0.0205), enamel lamellae (P < 0.036), dentinal tubules (P < 0.0057), interglobular dentin (P < 0.0001), sclerotic dentin – transmitted light (P < 0.00001), sclerotic dentin – polarized light (P < 0.0002) and Sharpey's fibers (P < 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: This initial study shows that cyanoacrylate is better than Canada balsam for observing certain features of ground sections of teeth. However, it remains to be seen whether it will be useful for studying undecalcified sections of carious teeth and for soft tissue sections.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4860929
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48609292016-05-18 Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam Vangala, Manogna RL Rudraraju, Amrutha Subramanyam, RV J Oral Maxillofac Pathol Original Article INTRODUCTION: Hard tissues can be studied by either decalcification or by preparing ground sections. Various mounting media have been tried and used for ground sections of teeth. However, there are very few studies on the use of cyanoacrylate adhesive as a mounting medium. AIMS: The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of cyanoacrylate adhesive (Fevikwik™) as a mounting medium for ground sections of teeth and to compare these ground sections with those mounted with Canada balsam. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ground sections were prepared from twenty extracted teeth. Each section was divided into two halves and mounted on one slide, one with cyanoacrylate adhesive (Fevikwik™) and the other with Canada balsam. Scoring for various features in the ground sections was done by two independent observers. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Statistical analysis using Student's t-test (unpaired) of average scores was performed for each feature observed. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the two for most of the features. However, cyanoacrylate was found to be better than Canada balsam for observing striae of Retzius (P < 0.0205), enamel lamellae (P < 0.036), dentinal tubules (P < 0.0057), interglobular dentin (P < 0.0001), sclerotic dentin – transmitted light (P < 0.00001), sclerotic dentin – polarized light (P < 0.0002) and Sharpey's fibers (P < 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: This initial study shows that cyanoacrylate is better than Canada balsam for observing certain features of ground sections of teeth. However, it remains to be seen whether it will be useful for studying undecalcified sections of carious teeth and for soft tissue sections. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4860929/ /pubmed/27194857 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-029X.180911 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Vangala, Manogna RL
Rudraraju, Amrutha
Subramanyam, RV
Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam
title Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam
title_full Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam
title_fullStr Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam
title_full_unstemmed Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam
title_short Mounting ground sections of teeth: Cyanoacrylate adhesive versus Canada balsam
title_sort mounting ground sections of teeth: cyanoacrylate adhesive versus canada balsam
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4860929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27194857
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-029X.180911
work_keys_str_mv AT vangalamanognarl mountinggroundsectionsofteethcyanoacrylateadhesiveversuscanadabalsam
AT rudrarajuamrutha mountinggroundsectionsofteethcyanoacrylateadhesiveversuscanadabalsam
AT subramanyamrv mountinggroundsectionsofteethcyanoacrylateadhesiveversuscanadabalsam