ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2024
Biological evaluation of critical bone defect regeneration using hydroxyapatite/ alginate composite granules.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Injectable Hydroxyapatite and Tetracalcium Phosphate Granules Combined with Autologous Bone Marrow Concentrate: Toward Shape-Adaptive, Single-Step Bone Regeneration.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Poly(propylene fumarate)/hydroxyapatite nanocomposite/black phosphorus nanosheet phosphate composites for enhanced bone repair.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- A new eggshell-derived calcium phosphate bioceramic for tissue engineering: cytotoxicity and histomorphometric study.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeto evaluate biocompatibility and osteogenic potential of hydroxyapatite/alginate composite after its implantation on rat calvarian critical bone defect.
methodsthirty adults male Wistar rats were randomly distributed into two groups: GHA - critical bone defect filled with hydroxyapatite/alginate composite granules (HA/Alg) and CG - critical bone defect without biomaterial; evaluated at biological points of 15, 45 and 120 days.
resultsthe histomorphometrically analyses for GHA showed osteoid matrix deposition (OM) among the granules and towards the center of the defect in centripetal direction throughout the study, with evident new bone formation at 120 days, resulting in filling 4/5 of the initial bone defect. For CG, this finding was restricted to the edges of the bone margins and formation of connective tissue on the residual area was found in all biological points. Inflammatory response on GHA was chronic granulomatous type, discrete and regressive for all biological points. Throughout the study, the CG presented mononuclear inflammatory infiltrate diffuse and regressive. Histomorphometry analyses showed that OM percentage was evident for GHA group when compared to CG group in all analyzed periods (p > 0.05).
conclusionsthe biomaterial evaluated at this study showed to be biocompatible, bioactive, osteoconductive and biodegradable synchronously with bone formation.
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.