2018
DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0059
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of different bone graft materials in peri-implant guided bone regeneration

Abstract: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of hydroxyapatite (HA), deproteinized bovine bone (DPB), human-derived allogenic bone (HALG), and calcium sulfate (CAP) graft biomaterials used with titanium barriers for bone augmentation to treat peri-implant defects in rat calvarium treated by guided bone regeneration (GBR). Thirty-two female Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into four groups: DPB, HALG, HA, and CAP. One titanium barrier was fixed to each rat's calvarium after the titanium implants had been fi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

1
20
0
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
1
20
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In the present study, the staining intensity of TG2 and VEGF, commonly accepted as markers for angiogenesis (Buemi et al., 2004), were comparable between the test and positive control groups at 8 and 16 weeks. These result are in agreement with previous studies also not reporting difference in VEGF expression when different bone substitutes were evaluated during the healing of peri‐implant defects in rats at 3 months (Artas et al., 2018). When evaluating the angiogenesis at the level of the barrier membrane, the pattern of transmembranous angiogenesis based on the VEGF and TG2 positive cells were different between the cross‐linked and non‐crosslinked membrane groups, being delayed in the cross‐linked group.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…In the present study, the staining intensity of TG2 and VEGF, commonly accepted as markers for angiogenesis (Buemi et al., 2004), were comparable between the test and positive control groups at 8 and 16 weeks. These result are in agreement with previous studies also not reporting difference in VEGF expression when different bone substitutes were evaluated during the healing of peri‐implant defects in rats at 3 months (Artas et al., 2018). When evaluating the angiogenesis at the level of the barrier membrane, the pattern of transmembranous angiogenesis based on the VEGF and TG2 positive cells were different between the cross‐linked and non‐crosslinked membrane groups, being delayed in the cross‐linked group.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…On the other hand, radiological and mechanical techniques have been used for structural and functional evaluations (50)(51)(52). Different bone graft materials are currently available for regeneration of bone defects in oral and maxillofacial surgery, such as the closure of osteotomy openings and alveolar increment (53)(54)(55)(56)(57). Synthetic bone graft materials are available in intra-bone defects, orthognathic surgery, facial bone defects, and maxillary sinus ground (54,(58)(59)(60)(61)(62)(63).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The necessity of having to harvest bone grafts is the major shortcoming of this procedure. Moreover, a possible risk of donor site morbidity and other adverse events in neighboring anatomical structures may be encountered [1][2][3][4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%