Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39633226›Full record

ArticleBiological trace element research2025

Boron-Doped Nano Hydroxyapatite Grafts for Bone Regeneration in Rat Mandibular Defects.

Berat Baturay Demirkiran, Zeynep Deniz Sahin Inan, Rasim Hamutoğlu, Kerim Emre Öksüz, Zekiye Hasbek, Emine Elif Altuntaş

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biological trace element research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Berat Baturay DemirkiranÇankırı State Hospital, Çankırı, Türkiye. baturaydemirkiran@gmail.com.
Zeynep Deniz Sahin InanSivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Türkiye.
Rasim HamutoğluSivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Türkiye.
Kerim Emre ÖksüzSivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Türkiye.
Zekiye HasbekSivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Türkiye.
Emine Elif AltuntaşSivas Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Türkiye.

Funding

Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of Sivas Cumhuriyet University T-912
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential effects of boron-doped nano hydroxyapatite grafts on craniofacial bone regeneration in critical bone defects in the mandibular corpus of rats, in terms of scintigraphic and histopathological aspects. Forty Wistar albino rats, with an average weight of 200-220 g, aged 16-18 weeks, and all male, were used in the study. The rats were randomly assigned to five groups, each containing 8 rats, as follows: group C1 (no procedure applied to the mandible), group C2 (surgical defect created in the mandible but no treatment applied), group nHA (nano hydroxyapatite applied to the surgical defect area), group nHA + B1 (nano hydroxyapatite + 1% boron applied to the surgical defect area), and group nHA + B2 (nano hydroxyapatite + 2% boron applied to the surgical defect area). A standard 4 × 4 mm full-thickness transosseous bone defect was created in the mandibular corpus of all rats, except for those in group C1. The bone defect in the rats in group C2 was left to heal naturally. Nano hydroxyapatite (nHA), nano hydroxyapatite + 1% boron, and nano hydroxyapatite + 2% boron were applied to the surgical defect areas of the other three groups, respectively. Bone scintigraphy was performed on all rats on days 0 (following the surgical procedure) and 28 of the experimental period. At the end of the 28th day, the animals were sacrificed, and tissue samples were collected for histological examination. A standard grading system was used to evaluate fracture healing. When the groups were compared in terms of bone healing histopathological scores, a statistically significant difference was observed between group C1 and the other groups (p < 0.005). In the statistical evaluation made according to the histopathological mean scores, the least improvement was observed in group C2. No statistically significant difference was observed between group nHA and group nHA + B1 and group C2 and between group nHA and group nHA + B1 in terms of bone healing scores (p > 0.005). A statistically significant difference was found between group nHA + B2 and group C2 (p = 0.026). Although there was no statistically significant difference in histopathological scores, the mean score closest to group C1 was observed in group nHA + B2. A statistically significant difference was observed between the groups in the scintigraphic evaluation performed on the 28th day of the experimental procedure, and the difference was between group C1 and group nHA + B1 and between group nHA and group nHA + B1 (p = 0.004; p = 0.028, p < 0.005). In the comparison of the values obtained on days 0 and 28 within the group, a statistically significant change was observed in group nHA + B1 and group nHA + B2 (p < 0.005). When the results of the present study were evaluated, it was thought that the boron-doped nHA graft biomaterials may have positive effects on bone healing. Providing a different perspective for the development of an alternative new treatment modality that can be locally applied in the treatment of fractures a serious and common health problem can be interpreted as an important outcome of the present study. We believe that this study will serve as a preliminary study for more comprehensive future studies on this subject.

Indexed as

Bone RegenerationBone SubstitutesBoronDurapatiteMandibleAnimalsMaleRatsRats, WistarBone SubstitutesBoronDurapatiteBone regenerationBoronIn vivo testsMandible fractureNano hydroxyapatiteScintigraphy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.