ArticleBMC oral health2025
Combined use of deproteinized bovine bone mineral and α-tricalcium phosphate using gelatin carriers.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo study the effect on biomaterial degradation and bone formation of different ratios between α-tricalcium phosphate (α-TCP) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) using various gelatins as a carrier. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirty-six critical-sized calvarial bone defects were randomly treated in 18 animals. Four biomaterials with different compositional relations of DBBM to α-TCP and granules to carrier were investigated: (1) 40 ± 10% DBBM/40 ± 10% α-TCP with 20 ± 10% gelatin type 1 in ratio 4:1 (B1/G1), (2) 20 ± 10% DBBM/60 ± 10% α-TCP with 20 ± 10% gelatin type 1 in ratio 4:1 (B2/G1), (3) 20 ± 10% DBBM/60 ± 10% α-TCP with 15 ± 10%/5 ± 5% gelatin type 2/ glycerine (B2/G2) and 4), 10 ± 10% DBBM/60 ± 10% α-TCP with 20 ± 10%/10 ± 10% gelatin type 2/ glycerine (B3/G2). As a positive control 50 ± 10% DBBM/50 ± 10% α-TCP without gelatin (PC, B1/G0) and as a negative control (NC) empty defects were chosen. All defects were covered with a collagen membrane. The samples were harvested 4 weeks post-surgically and examined by micro-CT and histomorphometric analysis.
resultsNew bone formation was evident in all defects. The mineralized tissue volume was significantly higher in the four tested biomaterials than in the NC group, but lower compared to the PC group. Histomorphometry showed similar levels of bone formation in all groups, whereas only the PC group reached a significantly higher total augmentation area than that of the NC. The PC group showed significantly higher mineralized tissue density and residual material area compared to the B3/G2 group, and more residual DBBM than the four tested biomaterials.
conclusionsNew bone formation was not significantly affected either by different DBBM:α-TCP compositional ratios nor the presence of various gelatin carriers. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Similar levels of osteoconductivity indicates the presumptive use of combined products in alveolar ridge augmentation to support bone formation. Gelatin with or without glycerine may be considered for its use as a carrier to the biomaterials frequently applied in peri-implant surgery.
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.