2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.06.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparative study of two methods of dental pulp extraction for genetic fingerprinting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In agreement with (Tilotta et al, 2010), the pulp was successfully extirpated in the current study by a standard endodontic access. The main advantage of this method is being conservative, so the tooth can be used for further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In agreement with (Tilotta et al, 2010), the pulp was successfully extirpated in the current study by a standard endodontic access. The main advantage of this method is being conservative, so the tooth can be used for further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…In sectioning the teeth, the access to the pulp chamber, by clear fracture, needs an experienced dentist. It is also difficult to perform teeth sectioning in case of pulp retraction (Tilotta et al, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Primary cells were isolated and cultured from the extracted impacted molars as previously described by three authors. [11][12][13] Briefly, HDP tissues from the pulp chamber and the root canal were collected and then digested with 0.3 mg collagenase type II (SERVA, Germany) enzyme for 2 hours at 37°C. Then, the cell strainer (70-μm) was infiltrated for the suspension of the single cell and the centrifugation at 60 g for 8 minutes was used for the collection of the cells which were suspended in the plating medium.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perhaps the effects of temperature are more pronounced over longer time frames. Tilotta et al (24) compared the nuclear DNA from teeth crushed to those in which the pulp remnants were sampled via regular endodontic access and noted a significantly higher yield from the teeth sampled via the more conservative technique. In this instance, 90% and 70% success rates for mtDNA and nuclear DNA recovery from teeth, respectively, dating back to 300 BC and 1600 AD were reported.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%