ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2021
Comparison of two different biomaterials in the bone regeneration (15, 30 and 60 days) of critical defects in rats.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fibrin and Marine-Derived Agaroses for the Generation of Human Bioartificial Tissues: An Ex Vivo and In Vivo Study.Marine drugs · 2023Article
- Systemic and local inflammatory response after implantation of biomaterial in critical bone injuries.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2023Article
- Usefulness of a Nanostructured Fibrin-Agarose Bone Substitute in a Model of Severely Critical Mandible Bone Defect.Polymers · 2021Article
- Tissue Engineering in Stomatology: A Review of Potential Approaches for Oral Disease Treatments.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate and compare two types of different scaffolds in critical bone defects in rats.
methodsSeventy male Wistar rats (280 ± 20 grams) divided into three groups: control group (CG), untreated animals; biomaterial group 1 (BG1), animals that received the scaffold implanted hydroxyapatite (HA)/poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid (PLGA); and biomaterial group 2 (BG2), animals that received the scaffolds HA/PLGA/Bleed. The critical bone defect was induced in the medial region of the skull calotte with the aid of an 8-mm-diameter trephine drill. The biomaterial was implanted in the form of 1.5 mm thick scaffolds, and samples were collected after 15, 30 and 60 days. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney test was used, with the significance level of 5% (p ≤ 0.05).
resultsHistology revealed morphological and structural differences of the neoformed tissue between the experimental groups. Collagen-1 (Col-1) findings are consistent with the histological ones, in which BG2 presented the highest amount of fibers in its tissue matrix in all evaluated periods. In contrast, the results of receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-Β ligand (Rank-L) immunoexpression were higher in BG2 in the periods of 30 and 60 days, indicating an increase of the degradation of the biomaterial and the remodeling activity of the bone.
conclusionsThe properties of the HA/PLGA/Bleed scaffold were superior when compared to the scaffold composed only by HA/PLGA.
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.