ArticleMaxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery2014
Soft Tissue Augmentation with Silk Composite Graft.
Article in Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of 4-Hexylresorcinol on Protein Expressions in RAW 264.7 Cells as Determined by Immunoprecipitation High Performance Liquid Chromatography.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Accelerated biodegradation of silk sutures through matrix metalloproteinase activation by incorporating 4-hexylresorcinol.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to evaluate the interaction between 4-hexylresorcinol (4HR) and antibody as that affects the performance of a silk-4HR combination graft for soft tissue augmentation in an animal model.
methodsThe silk graft materials consisted of four types: silk+10% tricalcium phosphate (TCP) (ST0), silk+10% TCP+1% 4HR (ST1), silk+10% TCP+3% 4HR (ST3), and silk+10% TCP+6% 4-HR (ST6). The antibody binding assay tested the 4HR effect and scanning electron microscopic (SEM) exam was done for silk grafts. The animal experiment used a subcutaneous pocket mouse model. The graft - SH0 or SH1 or SH3 or SH6 - was placed in a subcutaneous pocket. The animals were killed at one, two, and four weeks, postoperatively. The specimens were subjected to histological analysis and lysozyme assay.
resultsGroups with 4HR applied showed lower antibody binding affinity to antigen compared to groups without 4HR. In the SEM examination, there was no significant difference among groups. Histological examinations revealed many foreign body giant cells in ST0 and ST1 group at four weeks postoperatively. Both ST3 and ST6 groups developed significantly lower levels of giant cell values compared to ST0 and ST1 groups (P <0.001) at four weeks postoperatively. In the lysozyme assay, the ST1 and ST3 groups showed denser signals than the other groups.
conclusion4HR combined silk implants resulted in high levels of vascular and connective tissue regeneration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.