Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29742256›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2018

Evaluation of photobiomodulation therapy associated with guided bone regeneration in critical size defects. In vivo study.

Nicole Rosa de Freitas, Luísa Belluco Guerrini, Luis Augusto Esper, Michyele Cristhiane Sbrana, Gisele da Silva Dalben, Simone Soares, Ana Lúcia Pompéia Fraga de Almeida

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nicole Rosa de FreitasPós-Graduação em Reabilitação Oral, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Luísa Belluco GuerriniPós-Graduação em Reabilitação Oral, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Luis Augusto EsperSeção de Periodontia, Hospital de Reabilitação de Anomalias Craniofaciais, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Michyele Cristhiane SbranaSeção de Periodontia, Hospital de Reabilitação de Anomalias Craniofaciais, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Gisele da Silva DalbenSeção de Odontopediatria e Saúde Coletiva, Hospital de Reabilitação de Anomalias Craniofaciais, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Simone SoaresDepartamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.
Ana Lúcia Pompéia Fraga de AlmeidaDepartamento de Prótese e Periodontia, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The repair of bone defects raises the interest of investigators in several health specialties. Grafting techniques with bone substitutes and laser therapies have been investigated to replace autogenous bone and accelerate the bone healing process. Objective To evaluate the effect of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) associated with guided bone regeneration (GBR) in critical size defects. Material and Methods The study was conducted on 80 male rats (Rattus norvegicus albinus, Wistar) submitted to surgical creation of a critical size defect on the calvaria, divided into eight study groups: group C (control - only blood clot); group M (collagen membrane); group PBMT (photobiomodulation therapy); group AB (autogenous bone); group AB+PBMT; group AB+M; group PBMT+M; group AB+PBMT+M. The animals were killed 30 days postoperatively. After tissue processing, bone regeneration was evaluated by histomorphometric analysis and statistical analyses were performed (Tukey test, p<0.05). Results All groups had greater area of newly formed bone compared to group C (9.96±4.49%). The group PBMT+M (achieved the greater quantity of new bone (64.09±7.62%), followed by groups PBMT (47.67±8.66%), M (47.43±15.73%), AB+PBMT (39.15±16.72%) and AB+PBMT+M (35.82±7.68%). After group C, the groups AB (25.10±16.59%) and AB+M (22.72±13.83%) had the smallest quantities of newly formed bone. The area of remaining particles did not have statistically significant difference between groups AB+M (14.93±8.92%) and AB+PBMT+M (14.76±6.58%). Conclusion The PBMT utilization may be effective for bone repair, when associated with bone regeneration techniques.

Indexed as

AnimalsAutograftsBone RegenerationCollagenGuided Tissue RegenerationLow-Level Light TherapyMaleOsteogenesisRandom AllocationRats, WistarReference ValuesReproducibility of ResultsSkullTreatment OutcomeWound HealingCollagen

Identifiers

PMID29742256
PMCPMC5933825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.