These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Bone augmentation in rabbit calvariae: comparative study between Bio-Oss and a novel beta-TCP/DCPD granulate.
    Author: Tamimi FM, Torres J, Tresguerres I, Clemente C, López-Cabarcos E, Blanco LJ.
    Journal: J Clin Periodontol; 2006 Dec; 33(12):922-8. PubMed ID: 17092243.
    Abstract:
    AIM: In the present in vivo study, we compare the bone regeneration capacity of a novel brushite cement synthesized in our laboratory (DTG) with Bio-Oss using rabbits as an animal model. METHODS: The study was performed in a group of 14 adult New Zealand rabbits using the bone conduction model. Two titanium cylinders were fixed into perforated slits made on the parietal cortical bone of each rabbit. One cylinder was left empty (negative control) and the other was filled with either Bio-Oss or brushite set-cement granules (test cylinder). Four weeks after the intervention, the animals were sacrificed and biopsies were taken. The following parameters were analysed: bone tissue augmentation, bone mineral density and biomaterial resorption. The comparison of data between the different groups was performed using the Mann-Whitney test with a significance level of p<0.05. RESULTS: The mean bone mineral density and augmented mineral tissue inside the test cylinders were similar but higher than those of negative controls. Material resorption and bone tissue augmentation were significantly higher in the defects treated with the brushite-based set cement (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Brushite cement granules were more resorbable and generated more bone tissue than Bio-Oss inside the titanium cylinders placed in the rabbit calvaria.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]