ArticleBioMed research international2019
Porous Titanium Granules in comparison with Autogenous Bone Graft in Femoral Osseous Defects: A Histomorphometric Study of Bone Regeneration and Osseointegration in Rabbits.
Article in BioMed research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A New Anatomical Nano Interbody Fusion Device for Elderly Patients Undergoing Anterior Discectomy and Interbody Fusion.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Article
- Inhibiting the "isolated island" effect in simulated bone defect repair using a hollow structural scaffold design.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Platelet-rich fibrin as an autologous biomaterial for bone regeneration: mechanisms, applications, optimization.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Article
- Histological Evaluation of the Effect of Local Application ofInternational journal of biomaterials · 2022Article
- Adapting the Pore Size of Individual, 3D-Printed CPC Scaffolds in Maxillofacial Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe high resorption rate of autogenous bone is a well-documented phenomenon that can lead to insufficient bone quality and quantity in an augmented area. Nonresorbable bone substitutes might perform better than autogenous bone in certain applications if they are able to provide adequate bone formation and graft osseointegration. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the osseous regeneration and graft integration in standardized defects in the rabbit femur treated either with porous titanium granules or autogenous osseous graft. MATERIALS AND
methodsStandardized femoral osseous defects were surgically induced in 45 New Zealand rabbits. Fifteen were treated with porous titanium granules (TIGRAN™-PTG) and membrane (PTGM), 15 with autogenous graft and membrane (AGM), and 15 with membrane alone (CM, control). At six weeks, the defects were assessed histologically and histomorphometrically.
resultsPTGM as compared to AGM presented similar percentages of newly formed bone tissue, but a significantly higher fraction of the region of interest was filled with the bone substitute material. Accordingly, the composite of new bone plus bone substitute material showed significantly higher volumes for PTGM. Yet, the smaller amount of remaining autogenous bone was far better osseointegrated than the titanium granules, which in large regions showed no connection to newly formed bone. Both PTGM and AGM as compared to CM presented higher values of newly formed bone.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated that PTG was similarly effective as autogenous osseous graft in achieving osseous regeneration while PTG performed markedly better in graft volume stability. The resulting higher total percentage of new bone combined with the bone substitute material in PTG could provide a superior foundation for implant placement.
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.