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: The comparison of the negative effect of autoclaving and pasteurization on bone healing.
    Author: Vural R, Akesen B, Karakayalı M, Yalçınkaya U, Aydınlı U.
    Journal: Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc; 2010; 44(4):322-7. PubMed ID: 21252610.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of autoclaving and pasteurization on bone healing. METHODS: Twenty-five full-grown male rabbits were included in the study; all 25 had bone blocks resected and reimplanted. In group 1, bone blocks were autoclaved; in group 2, bone blocks were pasteurized; and in group 3 (controls), resected bone blocks were reimplanted without sterilization. RESULTS: Heiple scores of the proximal parts of the fusion surfaces in group 1, group 2, and group 3 were 12.8±0.4, 6.8±1.2, and 10.2±1.9, respectively. Heiple scores of the distal parts of the fusion surfaces in group 1, group 2, and group 3 were 10.8±0.8, 6.0±1.1, and 9.8±1.5, respectively. Differences in radiologic scores were not statistically significant between the groups for proximal or distal fusion surfaces at 3 and 6 weeks. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, pasteurization has a less negative effect on bone healing than autoclaving, and can be considered for bone sterilization in certain circumstances.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]