ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2018
Analysis of bone formation and membrane resorption in guided bone regeneration using deproteinized bovine bone mineral versus calcium sulfate.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2018. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bone Regeneration Capacity of Newly Developed Uncalcined/Unsintered Hydroxyapatite and Poly-l-lactide-co-glycolide Sheet in Maxillofacial Surgery: An In Vivo Study.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Bone Regeneration Potential of Uncalcined and Unsintered Hydroxyapatite/Poly l-lactide Bioactive/Osteoconductive Sheet Used for Maxillofacial Reconstructive Surgery: An In Vivo Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Influence of Age on Calvarial Critical Size Defect Dimensions: A Radiographic and Histological Study.The Journal of craniofacial surgeryArticle
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
Abstract
Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) is a technique based on the use of a physical barrier that isolates the region of bone regeneration from adjacent tissues. The objective of this study was to compare GBR, adopting a critical-size defect model in rat calvaria and using collagen membrane separately combined with two filling materials, each having different resorption rates. A circular defect 8 mm in diameter was made in the calvaria of Wistar rats. The defects were then filled with calcium sulfate (CaS group) or deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM group) and covered by resorbable collagen membrane. The animals were killed 15, 30, 45 and 60 days after the surgical procedure. Samples were collected, fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and processed for paraffin embedding. The resultant sections were stained with H&E for histological and histomorphometric study. For the histomorphometric study, the area of membrane was quantified along with the amount of bone formed in the region of the membrane. Calcium sulfate was reabsorbed more rapidly compared to DBBM. The CaS group had the highest percentages of remaining membrane at 15, 30, 45 and 60 days, compared to the DBBM group. The DBBM group had the highest amount of new bone at 45 and 60 days compared to the CaS group. Based on these results, it was concluded that the type of filling material may influence both the resorption of collagen membrane and amount of bone formed.
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.