Linked Life Data

11289623

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/11289623

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
1
pubmed:dateCreated
2001-4-5
pubmed:abstractText
The purpose of the study was to compare the efficacy of a non-resorbable polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) membrane (Gore-Tex) versus a resorbable polyglactin membrane (Vicryl) and a newly designed collagenic membrane for enhancing bone regeneration on rat skull defects. The study was conducted on 30 adult Wistar rats. On each animal, two symmetrical, 6 mm wide, full-thickness, skull defects were created in the parietal regions. The right defect was chosen as the experimental site and the left one was left empty as a control. Each experimental site was covered by an inner and outer membrane. The 30 rats were divided into three groups: In group 1 (n=10), a non-resorbable polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) membrane was used. In group 2 (n= 10), a resorbable polyglactin 910 membrane was used. In group 3 (n= 10), a collagen membrane processed from avian eggshell was used. In each group, the animals were euthanized at 60 days. The harvested specimens were processed for contact radiography and standard histological examination. The results were assessed by a Fisher's exact test. In group 1, partial bone healing was observed in seven out of 10 animals and complete in three out of 10 animals (P<0.001). In group 2, no or minimal bone healing was observed in seven out of 10 animals and partial bone healing was observed in three out of 10 animals. In group 3, no or minimal bone healing was observed in nine out of 10 cases and partial bone healing in only one animal. In conclusion, only the non-resorbable e-PTFE membrane group exhibited a favourable result in this study. This study suggests that the structure of the membrane is at least as important as its composition.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
D
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Feb
pubmed:issn
0901-5027
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
30
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
58-62
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Absorbable Implants, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Animals, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Azo Compounds, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Biocompatible Materials, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Bone Diseases, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Bone Regeneration, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Collagen, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Coloring Agents, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Egg Shell, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Eosine Yellowish-(YS), pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Membranes, Artificial, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Methyl Green, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Osteoblasts, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Parietal Bone, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Polyglactin 910, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Polytetrafluoroethylene, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Rats, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Rats, Wistar, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Statistics as Topic, pubmed-meshheading:11289623-Wound Healing
pubmed:year
2001
pubmed:articleTitle
Comparative study of three different membranes for guided bone regeneration of rat cranial defects.
pubmed:affiliation
Institute of Surgical Research, Montpellier, France. ldpx@yahoo.fr
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study