Biocompatibility of Portland cement combined with different radiopacifying agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the response of rat subcutaneous tissue to Portland cement combined with two different radiopacifying agents, iodoform (CHI3) and zirconium oxide (ZrO2). These materials were placed in polyethylene tubes and implanted into the dorsal connective tissue of Wistar rats for 7 and 15 days. The specimens were then stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and inflammatory reaction parameters were evaluated by light microscopy. The intensity of the inflammatory response to the sealants was analyzed by two blind calibrated observers throughout the experimental period. Histological analysis showed that all the materials caused a moderated inflammatory reaction at 7 days, which then diminished with time. At 15 days, the inflammatory reaction was almost absent, and fibroblasts and collagen fibers were observed indicating normal tissue healing. The degrees of the inflammatory reaction on different days throughout the experimental period were compared using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test. Statistical analysis demonstrated no significant differences amongst the groups, and Portland cement associated with radiopacifying agents gave satisfactory results. Therefore, Portland cement used in combination with radiopacifying agents can be considered a biocompatible material. Although our results are very encouraging, further studies are needed in order to establish safe clinical indications for Portland cement combined with radiopacifying agents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".