4.6 Article

Application of Teeth in Toxicological Analysis of Decomposed Cadavers Using a Carbamazepine-Administered Rat Model

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13020311

关键词

autopsy; blood concentration; carbamazepine; forensic odontology; fresh frozen sections; MS imaging; postmortem biochemical analysis; teeth; toxicant; toxicology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to estimate the blood carbamazepine (CBZ) concentration from teeth and found that tooth CBZ concentrations were highly correlated with serum CBZ concentrations in rats. The study also revealed that CBZ concentrations in teeth did not substantially change after death, with high CBZ distribution observed in the pulp cavity.
In a regular autopsy, blood and organs are used to quantify drug and toxicant concentrations; however, specimens such as blood cannot be collected from highly decomposed corpses, making the quantification of drug and toxicants impossible. This study aimed to estimate the blood carbamazepine (CBZ) concentration from teeth, a part of the human body that is best preserved after death. We sampled teeth and blood of rats administered CBZ. The correlation between the tooth and serum CBZ concentrations was analyzed. Rats were euthanized after CBZ administration and kept at 22 degrees C for 0 to 15 days before sampling the teeth and measuring the CBZ concentration. Undecalcified, fresh, frozen sections of rat teeth were prepared, and CBZ localization was evaluated. CBZ concentrations in both teeth and cardiac blood peaked at 60 min after administration and increased in a dose-dependent manner. CBZ concentration in teeth did not substantially change after death, with high CBZ distribution being observed in the pulp cavity. The tooth and serum CBZ concentrations were highly correlated, suggesting that the measurement of toxicant concentration in sampled teeth would allow for the estimation of blood toxicant concentration in highly decomposed corpses.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据