The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 138, No 9, 1234-1240.
© 2007 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Windsor, L. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Windsor, L. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Endodontics

RESEARCH

JADA Continuing Education

An Evaluation of DNA Yield, DNA Quality and Bite Registration From a Dental Impression Wafer



Mark A. Ellis, DDS, MSD, Fengyu Song, DDS, MS, PhD, Edwin T. Parks, DMD, MS, George J. Eckert, MAS, Jeffrey A. Dean, DDS, MSD and L. Jack Windsor, PhD

Background. The authors determined the amount and quality of the DNA captured by a bite impression wafer and analyzed any inaccuracies in the impression wafer.

Methods. The authors made bite registrations for subjects aged 7 to 12 years by using a dental impression wafer (Toothprints, Kerr, Orange, Calif.), obtained an oral rinse sample, took cheek cells by using buccal swabs and made an alginate impression to pour a stone model. They extracted and quantified the DNA from the dental impression wafer, mouthwash and buccal swabs by using the Quant-iT PicoGreen (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, Calif.) assay and a real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. They compared the stone models and imprints from the wafer.

Results. The average amounts of DNA determined by using Quant-iT PicoGreen from the buccal swab, mouthwash and dental impression wafer samples were 113.61, 509.57 and 1.03 micrograms, respectively. The average amounts of DNA determined by using RT-PCR from the buccal swab, mouthwash and dental impression wafer samples were 11.5240, 22.2540 and 0.0279 µg, respectively. The bite registrations and stone models had an average of 14 percent of mismatches.

Conclusion. The dental impression wafers captured DNA but not in high quantities. They did not produce an accurate representation of the dentition.

Clinical Implications. The dental impression wafers captured enough DNA to permit amplification. The accuracy of the bite registration was not sufficient for identification purposes. Therefore, dental impression wafers may be useful only as a reservoir for DNA.

Key Words: Real-time polymerase chain reaction; bite registration; mouthwash; buccal swab; dental impression wafer

Abbreviations: ABFO: American Board of Forensic Odontology • DPI: Dots per inch • PCR: Polymerase chain reaction • RT-PCR: Real-time polymerase chain reaction.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-2007 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.