Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31170752›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2019

Comparison of the Efficacy of Three Different Bone Regeneration Materials: An Animal Study.

R Tamil Anbu, V Suresh, Revathy Gounder, Abinaya Kannan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of dentistry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. T-scans in implant procedures.Bioinformation · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Practice management in undergraduate dental program: The need among dental students.Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Knowledge and awareness of forensic dentistry course among undergraduates.Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Knowledge and awareness on neurolept anesthesia among dental students.Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Effect of brushing simulation on the surface roughness of soft-tissue liners: AnJournal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

R Tamil Anbu *Department of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
V Suresh *Department of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Revathy GounderDepartment of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Abinaya Kannan *Department of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe proposed study aimed to evaluate and compare the bone regeneration between commercially available hydroxyapatite-β-tricalcium phosphate (Ossifi; Equinox, the Netherlands), powdered polylactic acid (powdered PLA; Sigma-Aldrich, United States), and three-dimensionally printed PLA (3D-printed PLA; Cubex, SC, United States) using 3D printer (Cube X trio) in an animal model. MATERIALS AND

methodsEighteen New Zealand rabbits were divided into three groups with six animals each. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) was collected from the venous blood and preserved. Bone defect (4 mm × 2 mm) without disturbing the bone marrow was created and filled with bone graft material (group 1-Ossifi, group 2-powdered PLA, and group 3-3D-printed PLA), over which PRF membranes were placed. The graft material and the barrier were stabilized using resorbable sutures, and all the animals were maintained for 4, 8, and 12 weeks, after which they were euthanized, and bone samples were retrieved. Retrieved bone samples were subjected to radiological and histological analysis.

resultsThe radiographic and histological changes of 3D-printed PLA in comparison with other two materials (Ossifi and powdered PLA) seemed to have a significant difference.

conclusion3D-printed PLA scaffolds showed positive signs of bone regeneration around the material in continuity defects. PLA material can be a promising alternative bone regenerative material.

Identifiers

PMID31170752
PMCPMC6635883

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.