ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2019
Biological and microbiological behavior of calcium aluminate cement-based blend for filling of bone defects.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of bioinks for 3D printing microporous, sintered calcium phosphate scaffolds.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2021Article
- Crystalline phase evolution and thermal behavior of zirconia-lanthanum aluminate ceramics produced by surface modification.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Calcium aluminate cement (CAC) as a biomaterial has been evaluated for its physical, mechanical and biocompatibility properties. Furthermore, the application of CAC for bone repair is due to its composition and coefficient of thermal expansion, which is similar to that of human bone. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate compositions of CAC-based blends as substitutes for bone defects. Five compositions of blends (alumina, zirconia, hydroxyapatite, tricalcium phosphate, chitosan), in addition to the base cement consisting of homogeneous CAC were evaluated as a substitute for bone repair. Additionally, the monotypic biofilm formation was assessed. Creation of a monocortical bone defect was performed on the femurs of rats, which were randomly filled with the different materials. The polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) group was used as a control. All the animals were euthanized 04 weeks after the surgery procedure. Subsequently, computerized microtomography, histological and histomorphometric analyses were performed to verify the bone repair. To evaluate the formation of biofilms, reference strains of Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were cultured on the samples, and the biofilm formed was quantified by the MTT method. In the microtomography and histomorphometry results, it was observed that the blends exhibited better results than the control group, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) for alumina and zirconia blends. In the biofilm formation, a statistical difference (p < 0.05) in general was observed between the alumina blends and the control group (p < 0.05). It was concluded that CAC-based blends with alumina and zirconia are promising for use in fillings for bone repair.
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.