ArticleBMC oral health2025
The histopathologic evaluation of local effects of ozone therapy on the healing of experimental calvarial defects of rats.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluates the effects of ozone on hard and soft tissue healing when a free tissue flap is used to close wound areas lacking primary closure over autogenous grafted sites.
methodsIn our study, 24 male Wistar rats were divided into four groups: two control groups and two ozone-treated groups. All rats underwent the same surgical procedure. After surgery, the control groups received no additional treatment, while the ozone groups received topical ozone application. Ozone was applied for 2 min, three times per week, with one-day intervals, for a duration of 2 weeks post-surgery. Sacrifice was performed on the 14th day for one control and one ozone group, and on the 28th day for the remaining groups. All soft and hard tissue samples were then examined histopathologically. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: not applicable.
resultsHistopathological evaluations and statistical analyses on the 14th day indicated that bone healing was significantly better in the ozone group compared to the control group (p = 0.049). For soft tissue healing, although there was no statistically significant difference between the ozone and control groups, proportional values showed better recovery in the ozone-treated groups compared to the controls.
conclusionsThe present study concludes that ozone has a positive effect on new bone formation in the early stages; however, it showed no statistically significant effect on soft tissue healing. We believe that further comprehensive studies would be beneficial to confirm these findings.
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.