ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2017
Histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of bone regeneration using nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite and human freeze-dried bone graft : An experimental study in rabbit.
Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Histomorphometric Assessment of Non-Decalcified Plastic-Embedded Specimens for Evaluation of Bone Regeneration Using Bone Substitute Materials-A Systematic Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Demineralized dentin matrix for bone regeneration in dentistry: A critical update.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Review
- Comparison of Nanocrystalline Hydroxyapatite Bone Graft with Empty Defects in Long Bone Fractures: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Effects of nanofiber scaffolds coated with nanoparticulate and micro-particulate FDBA on the morphology, adhesion and proliferation of human mesenchymal stem cells.Iranian biomedical journal · 2022Article
- Mesoporous Hydroxyapatite/Chitosan Loaded With Recombinant-Human Amelogenin Could Enhance Antibacterial Effect and Promote Periodontal Regeneration.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBone regeneration is an important concern in periodontal treatment and implant dentistry. Different biomaterials and surgical techniques have been used for this purpose. The aim of the present study was to compare the effect of nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite and human freeze-dried bone graft (FDBG) in regeneration of rabbit calvarium bony defects by histologic and histomorphometric evaluation.
methodsIn this experimental study, three similar defects, measuring 8 mm in diameter, were created in the calvaria of 16 white New Zealand rabbits. Two defects were filled with FDBG and nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite silica gel, while the other one remained unfilled to be considered as control. All the defects were covered with collagen membranes. During the healing period, two animals perished; so 14 rabbits were divided into two groups: half of them were euthanized after 6 weeks of healing and the other half after 12 weeks. The specimens were subjected to histologic and histomorphometric examinations for assessment of the following variables: percentage of bone formation and residual graft material, inflammation scores, patterns of bone formation and type of newly formed bone.
resultsThe percentages of new bone formation after 6 weeks were 14.22 ± 7.85, 21.57 ± 6.91, and 20.54 ± 10.07% in FDBG, NanoBone, and control defects. These values were 27.54 ± 20.19, 23.86 ± 6.27, and 26.48 ± 14.18% in 12-week specimens, respectively. No significant differences were found in the amount of bone formation between the groups. With regard to inflammation, the control and NanoBone groups showed significantly less inflammation compared to FDBG at the 6-week healing phase (P = 0.04); this difference was not significant in the 12-week specimens.
conclusionsBased on the results of this experimental study, both NanoBone and FDBG exhibited a similar effect on bone formation.
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.