ArticleJournal of periodontal & implant science2024
Comparison of the biocompatibility and osteogenesis potential of whitlockite and an activin A/BMP2 chimera using a rat calvarial defect model: a pilot study.
Article in Journal of periodontal & implant science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Whitlockite as a next-generation biomaterial for bone regeneration: A systematic review ofJournal of oral biology and craniofacial researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate bone regeneration using whitlockite (WH) nanoparticles, collagenated bovine bone mineral, and an activin A/BMP2 chimera (AB204) on calvarial defects in rats.
methodsThis study was conducted using 8 rats. Five-millimeter circular defects were formed on each side of the calvaria. The defects were randomly assigned to 3 groups (BO group: BioOss collagen, BO/WH group: BO + WH, and BO/WH/AB204 group: BO + WH + AB204). After healing periods of 2 and 4 weeks, histological and histomorphometric analyses were performed after sacrifice.
resultsThe BO/WH/AB204 group showed superior bone healing compared to the other 2 groups (BO and BO/WH). In the BO and BO/WH groups, new bone formation was found in the defect margin. However, in the BO/WH/AB204 group, new bone was observed on the upper and lower surfaces of the grafted area. The new bone area of the BO/WH/AB204 group at 4 weeks was significantly higher than that of the same group at 2 weeks. At 4 weeks, the total augmented area and material area in the BO/WH/AB204 group were significantly lower than the corresponding values at 2 weeks.
conclusionsThe BO/WH/AB204 group showed superior results of bone regeneration at 2 and 4 weeks compared to the BO and BO/WH groups. AB204 seems to play an important role in bone regeneration.
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.