Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39027209›Full record

ArticleJournal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry2024

Comparison of the healing process of xenografts with three different sources in critical-size bone defects: An in vivo study.

Reza Amid, Mahdi Kadkhodazadeh, Aida Kheiri, Shiva Esfandiari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Reza AmidDental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8053-3928
Mahdi KadkhodazadehDental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6131-2791
Aida KheiriDental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5311-1260
Shiva EsfandiariDepartment of Biology, School of Science, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Xenograft bone substitutes can be obtained from different animals and processed using various methods. The present in vivo study evaluated bone regeneration after using three types of xenografts with different sources in critical-sized bone defects in rabbit calvaria. Methods: Four 8-mm defects were created in calvaria of 14 New Zealand and white male rabbits. Three out of four defects were filled with xenografts of bovine, camel, and ostrich sources. The fourth defect was left unfilled as the control group. Seven rabbits were sacrificed after eight weeks and seven others after 12 weeks. Micro-CT imaging and histologic evaluation were further performed on dissected calvarias. Results: After 8 and 12 weeks, the highest and lowest percentages of new bone formation were observed in the camel (27.71% and 41.92%) and control (11.33% and 15.96%) groups, respectively. In the case of residual material, the ostrich group had the most value after eight weeks (53%), while after 12 weeks, it was highest in the camel group (37%). Micro-CT findings were consistent with histologic results. Conclusion: Although all three xenografts can be good choices for treating bone defects, camel-sourced xenograft seemed to be better than the other two groups. The origin and processing procedures of xenografts affected their final characteristics, which should be considered for clinical use.

Indexed as

Bone graftingBone regenerationBone substitutesXenograft

Identifiers

PMID39027209
PMCPMC11252156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.