Artigo
Bone healing in surgically created defects treated with either bioactive glass particles, a calcium sulfate barrier, or a combination of both materials: A histological and histometric study in rat tibias
Date
2005-12-01Registration in:
Clinical Oral Implants Research, v. 16, n. 6, p. 683-691, 2005.
0905-7161
1600-0501
10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01090.x
WOS:000233290200008
2-s2.0-33644697375
8399870097572073
9831236034935598
Author
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to histologically analyze the influence of bioactive glass and/or a calcium sulfate barrier on bone healing in surgically created defects in rat tibias. Material and methods: Sixty-four rats were divided into 4 groups: C (control), CS (calcium sulfate), BG (bioactive glass), and BG/CS (bioactive glass/calcium sulfate). A surgical defect was created in the tibia of each animal. In Group CS, a calcium sulfate barrier was placed to cover the defect. In Group BG the defect was filled with bioactive glass. In Group BG/CS, it was filled with bioactive glass and protected by a barrier of calcium sulfate. Animals were sacrificed at 10 or 30 days post-operative. The formation of new bone in the cortical area of the defect was evaluated histomorphometrically. Results: At 10 days post-operative, Group C presented significantly more bone formation than Groups CS, BG, or BG/CS. No statistically significant differences were found between the experimental groups. At 30 days post-operative, Group C demonstrated significantly more bone formation than the experimental groups. Groups CS and BG/CS showed significantly more bone formation than Group BG. No statistically significant differences were found between Group CS and BG/CS. Conclusions: (a) the control groups had significantly more bone formation than the experimental groups; (b) at 10 days post-operative, no significant differences were found between any of the experimental groups; and (c) at 30 days post-operative, the groups with a calcium sulfate barrier had significantly more bone formation than the group that used bioactive glass only. Copyright © Blackwell Munksgaard 2005.