ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Descriptive Histological and Histomorphometrical Comparison of Four Xenogeneic and Synthetic Bone Blocks for Mandibular Onlay Augmentation in Rabbits.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Implants Placed with a Ring Technique Using Inlay and Onlay Block Xenografts in the Mandible of Rabbits.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe conformation of the recipient site for an inlay graft presents an increased contact with the parent bone compared to an onlay graft. This might favor bone growth within the inlay compared to onlay grafts. Hence, the objective of this study was to compare the bone incorporation and remodeling processes of xenogeneic en bloc grafts placed using two bone grafting techniques, i.e., onlay vs. inlay.
methodsIn this prospective, randomized, split-mouth study (test and control sides in the same animal), two bone grafting techniques were comparatively evaluated. The lateral aspect of the rabbit mandible was used as the recipient site, bilaterally. On one side of the mandible, the cortical bone was perforated with drills to allow a better bone formation from the bone wound and the marrow spaces. A xenogeneic bone block was fixed in the center of the prepared region, representing the onlay site. On the other side of the mandible, a 7 mm wide and 3 mm deep circumferential defect was prepared using trephines and drills. A xenogeneic bone block was fixed in the center of the defect, representing the inlay site. Two healing periods were applied in the study: 2 and 10 weeks, each represented by 10 rabbits (
resultsAfter 2 weeks of healing, the mean percentage of new bone was 10.4% and 23.3% at the onlay and inlay grafts, respectively (
conclusionThe percentage of new bone increased faster and was higher in the inlay grafts than in the onlay grafts. This outcome might be related to the self-contained conformation of the recipient site in the inlay group, which offered more sources for new bone formation compared to the one-wall conformation of the recipient sites in the onlay group. The osteoconductive properties of the biomaterial allowed the newly formed bone to reach the most peripheral regions in both groups. The osteoconductive properties of the biomaterial, together with the protection offered by the collagen membrane, allowed marginal closure of the defects by newly formed bone in the inlay group.
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.