Publicação: Tissue response to different incision tools in animal model
dc.contributor.author | Torres-Augusto Neto, Renato [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | Comachio, Cássio Amaro [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | de Almeida, Lilian Caldas Quirino [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | de Azambuja Carvalho, Pedro Henrique [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | dos Santos Trento, Guilherme [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | Pereira-Filho, Valfrido Antônio [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.institution | Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-03-01T21:03:50Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-03-01T21:03:50Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-01-01 | |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the repair of incisions performed with microdissection electrocautery tip, conventional electrocautery tip, high potency diode laser, and conventional scalpel blade in a in vivo model. Methods: Different incisions were performed in adults Holtzman rats using the four types of instruments: microdissection electrocautery tip, conventional electrocautery tip, high potency diode laser, and conventional scalpel blade, in different periods of healing process. Thirty rats were divided into 5 groups, according to the period of euthanasia—24 h, 48 h, 72 h, 7 days, and 14 days. All animals received four incisions, each by a different method. Quantitative histological and histomorphometric analyses were performed using hematoxylin and eosin (HE) and Picrosirius Red staining. Results: Inflammatory profile and tissue repair presented small statistically significance differences comparing conventional scalpel blade and microdissection tip; moreover, both presented quantitatively superior to the others. Conclusion: It is believed that the microdissection tip can perform a dynamic incision just as a common scalpel blade, but more effective. Furthermore, it can promote a better hemostatic control of the surgical field that is comparable to conventional electrocautery tip without affecting tissue repair. | en |
dc.description.affiliation | School of Dentistry Araraquara - Diagnosis and Surgery Department São Paulo State University (UNESP), Rua Humaitá, 1680 - Centro - Araraquara, SP | |
dc.description.affiliationUnesp | School of Dentistry Araraquara - Diagnosis and Surgery Department São Paulo State University (UNESP), Rua Humaitá, 1680 - Centro - Araraquara, SP | |
dc.identifier | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10006-022-01105-7 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s10006-022-01105-7 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1865-1569 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1865-1550 | |
dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-85135277436 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/241453 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery | |
dc.source | Scopus | |
dc.subject | Diode laser | |
dc.subject | Electrocoagulation | |
dc.subject | Microdissection | |
dc.subject | Surgical wound | |
dc.subject | Wound healing | |
dc.title | Tissue response to different incision tools in animal model | en |
dc.type | Artigo | pt |
dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | ca4c0298-cd82-48ee-a9c8-c97704bac2b0 | |
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | ca4c0298-cd82-48ee-a9c8-c97704bac2b0 | |
unesp.author.orcid | 0000-0001-5206-8291[1] | |
unesp.author.orcid | 0000-0002-3088-4017[2] | |
unesp.author.orcid | 0000-0001-9545-9620[3] | |
unesp.author.orcid | 0000-0003-2670-7998[4] | |
unesp.author.orcid | 0000-0002-5363-9751[5] | |
unesp.author.orcid | 0000-0001-8736-7507[6] | |
unesp.campus | Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia, Araraquara | pt |
unesp.department | Diagnóstico e Cirurgia - FOAR | pt |