Cargando…
Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue in oral radiology studies
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish which materials afford better simulation of soft tissues in Oral Radiology studies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample was composed of four materials in eleven different thicknesses to simulate the soft tissues of the face. The mean values of the relat...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru da Universidade de São
Paulo
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5349056/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20857005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572010000300012 |
_version_ | 1782514392375492608 |
---|---|
author | CALDAS, Maria de Paula RAMOS-PEREZ, Flávia Maria de Moraes de ALMEIDA, Solange Maria HAITER-NETO, Francisco |
author_facet | CALDAS, Maria de Paula RAMOS-PEREZ, Flávia Maria de Moraes de ALMEIDA, Solange Maria HAITER-NETO, Francisco |
author_sort | CALDAS, Maria de Paula |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish which materials afford better simulation of soft tissues in Oral Radiology studies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample was composed of four materials in eleven different thicknesses to simulate the soft tissues of the face. The mean values of the relative amounts of radiographic contrast of the materials were determined and compared to a gold standard value, which was obtained from 20 patients who were referred to have periapical radiographs taken of the left mandibular molars. Data were subjected to statistical analysis with Dunnett's test (p<0.05). RESULTS: The mean value of the relative amounts of contrast encountered in the patients was 0.47, with a range between 0.36 and 0.64 for all 44 material/thickness combinations. The majority of the tested materials showed values close to those of the patients’ tissues, without statistically significant differences among them. The values of only three materials/ thickness combinations differed statistically from those of the patients’ tissues. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of the present study, it may be concluded that except for utility wax (4 mm and 8 mm) and water (4 mm), all materials tested at different thickness could be used as soft tissue substitute materials in Oral Radiology studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5349056 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru da Universidade de São
Paulo |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53490562017-03-17 Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue in oral radiology studies CALDAS, Maria de Paula RAMOS-PEREZ, Flávia Maria de Moraes de ALMEIDA, Solange Maria HAITER-NETO, Francisco J Appl Oral Sci Original Articles OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish which materials afford better simulation of soft tissues in Oral Radiology studies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample was composed of four materials in eleven different thicknesses to simulate the soft tissues of the face. The mean values of the relative amounts of radiographic contrast of the materials were determined and compared to a gold standard value, which was obtained from 20 patients who were referred to have periapical radiographs taken of the left mandibular molars. Data were subjected to statistical analysis with Dunnett's test (p<0.05). RESULTS: The mean value of the relative amounts of contrast encountered in the patients was 0.47, with a range between 0.36 and 0.64 for all 44 material/thickness combinations. The majority of the tested materials showed values close to those of the patients’ tissues, without statistically significant differences among them. The values of only three materials/ thickness combinations differed statistically from those of the patients’ tissues. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of the present study, it may be concluded that except for utility wax (4 mm and 8 mm) and water (4 mm), all materials tested at different thickness could be used as soft tissue substitute materials in Oral Radiology studies. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru da Universidade de São Paulo 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC5349056/ /pubmed/20857005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572010000300012 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles CALDAS, Maria de Paula RAMOS-PEREZ, Flávia Maria de Moraes de ALMEIDA, Solange Maria HAITER-NETO, Francisco Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue in oral radiology studies |
title | Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue
in oral radiology studies |
title_full | Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue
in oral radiology studies |
title_fullStr | Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue
in oral radiology studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue
in oral radiology studies |
title_short | Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue
in oral radiology studies |
title_sort | comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue
in oral radiology studies |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5349056/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20857005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572010000300012 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT caldasmariadepaula comparativeevaluationamongdifferentmaterialstoreplacesofttissueinoralradiologystudies AT ramosperezflaviamariademoraes comparativeevaluationamongdifferentmaterialstoreplacesofttissueinoralradiologystudies AT dealmeidasolangemaria comparativeevaluationamongdifferentmaterialstoreplacesofttissueinoralradiologystudies AT haiternetofrancisco comparativeevaluationamongdifferentmaterialstoreplacesofttissueinoralradiologystudies |