ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2017
Investigations of silk fiber/calcium phosphate cement biocomposite for radial bone defect repair in rabbits.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate the effects of silk fiber (SF)/calcium phosphate cement (CPC) biocomposite on repairing radial bone defects in rabbits.
methodsFour-month-old New Zealand rabbits were selected to create a bilateral radial bone defect model and divided into four groups according to implanted material: SF/CPC, SF/CPC/particulate bone (PB), PB, and control (C). The specimens were removed at four and eight postoperative weeks for general observation, X-ray examination, tissue slicing, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and biomechanical testing.
resultsPostoperative X-ray showed no bone defect repair in group C and different degrees of bone defect repair in the other three groups. Imaging, histology, and SEM showed the following: group SF/CPC formed fine trabecular bone in week 4, while the maximum bending load in group SF/CPC in week 4 was significantly different from those in the other groups (P < 0.05).
conclusionsSF/CPC has good biocompatibility and bone-inducing ability, demonstrating its bone defect-repairing ability.
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.