title: Human histological research: is it necessary? Humane? Ethical?
abstract: A review of the dental literature in the United States over the past 60 years is replete with studies utilizing human histological evidence for research. The first reference found for the use of human tissue for histological study was published in 1941 in the Journal of Dental Research.(1) Much of this literature focuses on the use of block sections, in which teeth scheduled for extraction are removed along with portions of the surrounding soft tissue and bone in order to study the effects of various interventions. The tissue removed in no way facilitates the surgical extraction of the tooth. It is removed to establish the type of healing, repair, or regeneration by histological evidence. There is no compensating benefit to the patient who, in fact, is put at risk--the removal of the extra tissue may compromise the fit of a subsequent prosthetic restoration.
authors: Department of Periodontics, Geriatrics and Prevention, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, 1011 N. University Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1078, USA.
authors: Alden M
authors: AM
authors: Leib
authors: Charles J
authors: CJ
authors: Kowalski
mesh_terms: D018865:Dental Research / Q000941:ethics*; D032984:Ethics, Research; D006653:Histology / Q000941:ethics*; D006805:Human Experimentation / Q000941:ethics; D006801:Humans