Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin

Abstract: Dentin permeability was measured alternatively with two methods: a 10-ul capillary method with visual evaluation (PC) and a motorized automatic measuring device (Flodec, FD), both interposed in a simulated perfusion system. Eight human third molar coronal fragments were connected to system...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Macorra García, José Carlos De La, Escribano, Nuria Isabel
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2002
País:España
Institución:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
Repositorio:Docta Complutense
Idioma:español
OAI Identifier:oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/60352
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/60352
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Dentin
Perfusion
Permeability
Materiales dentales
3213.13 Ortodoncia-Estomatología
id ES_ae5abfc2d36a32e13bc47ba1cedd8f0c
oai_identifier_str oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/60352
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentinMacorra García, José Carlos De LaEscribano, Nuria IsabelDentinPerfusionPermeabilityMateriales dentales3213.13 Ortodoncia-EstomatologíaAbstract: Dentin permeability was measured alternatively with two methods: a 10-ul capillary method with visual evaluation (PC) and a motorized automatic measuring device (Flodec, FD), both interposed in a simulated perfusion system. Eight human third molar coronal fragments were connected to systems, and their permeability to distilled water measured at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 29 cmH2O pressure. Resultant permeabilities (in ul/s) for both techniques were interrelated with the use of the Passing and Bablok nonparametric method, which gives information about the range of constant and proportional errors and their 95% confidence intervals (95CI). The relationship between the methods is described by the regression formula: FD =-0.0003 + 0.945·PC, with 95CI for constant (-0.0015–0.0009) and for slope (0.738–1.168), indicating that both methods are interchangeable, although not identical.Universidad Complutense de Madrid20022002-01-0120022002-01-01journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/60352reponame:Docta Complutenseinstname:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)Españolspaopen accesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/603522026-06-02T12:44:21Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
title Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
spellingShingle Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
Macorra García, José Carlos De La
Dentin
Perfusion
Permeability
Materiales dentales
3213.13 Ortodoncia-Estomatología
title_short Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
title_full Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
title_fullStr Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
title_sort Comparison of two methods to measure permeability of dentin
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Macorra García, José Carlos De La
Escribano, Nuria Isabel
author Macorra García, José Carlos De La
author_facet Macorra García, José Carlos De La
Escribano, Nuria Isabel
author_role author
author2 Escribano, Nuria Isabel
author2_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Complutense de Madrid
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Dentin
Perfusion
Permeability
Materiales dentales
3213.13 Ortodoncia-Estomatología
topic Dentin
Perfusion
Permeability
Materiales dentales
3213.13 Ortodoncia-Estomatología
description Abstract: Dentin permeability was measured alternatively with two methods: a 10-ul capillary method with visual evaluation (PC) and a motorized automatic measuring device (Flodec, FD), both interposed in a simulated perfusion system. Eight human third molar coronal fragments were connected to systems, and their permeability to distilled water measured at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 29 cmH2O pressure. Resultant permeabilities (in ul/s) for both techniques were interrelated with the use of the Passing and Bablok nonparametric method, which gives information about the range of constant and proportional errors and their 95% confidence intervals (95CI). The relationship between the methods is described by the regression formula: FD =-0.0003 + 0.945·PC, with 95CI for constant (-0.0015–0.0009) and for slope (0.738–1.168), indicating that both methods are interchangeable, although not identical.
publishDate 2002
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2002
2002-01-01
2002
2002-01-01
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv journal article
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.type.openaire.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/60352
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/60352
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Español
spa
language_invalid_str_mv Español
language spa
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.openaire.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Docta Complutense
instname:Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
instname_str Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)
reponame_str Docta Complutense
collection Docta Complutense
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869416554633887744
score 15.301603

Similares en LA Referencia