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: Histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of two bone substitute materials for bone regeneration: an experimental study in sheep.
    Author: Paknejad M, Emtiaz S, Rokn A, Islamy B, Safiri A.
    Journal: Implant Dent; 2008 Dec; 17(4):471-9. PubMed ID: 19077585.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: In the past decade, there has been an increase focus on regeneration approaches as related to periodontics and implant therapies. The main objective of the present study is the evaluation of quality, density, and thickness of the newly formed bone in experimental defects treated with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) and bioapatite-collagen. MATERIALS: Fifteen identical cuboidal defects were prepared in the alveolar edentulous mandibular ridges in 10 male sheep. Defects were randomly assigned to be treated either with DBBM, Bioapatite-collagen or remained unfilled as the control group. Defects of these 3 groups were histologically examined after 6 months. RESULTS: The mean percentages of bone regeneration with DBBM, Bioapatite-collagen, and control group were 51.40% +/- 3.57%, 27.66% +/- 4.18%, and 19% +/- 1%, respectively (P < 0.05). Defects filled with Bio-Oss and control defects did not show foreign body reaction, whereas Biostite particles had a reaction in 40% of the specimens. Trabecular thickness and type of new regenerated bone were also significantly different between Bio-Oss and Biostite (P < 0.05) and control group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results of the present study suggest that using of DBBM particles can promote bone regeneration more effectively than Bioapatite-collagen, and both materials were more promising than the control group.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]