کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
5157353 | 1500592 | 2017 | 45 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Comparative study on the healing potential of chitosan, polymethylmethacrylate, and demineralized bone matrix in radial bone defects of rat
دانلود مقاله + سفارش ترجمه
دانلود مقاله ISI انگلیسی
رایگان برای ایرانیان
کلمات کلیدی
Ethanol (PubChem CID: 702) - اتانول (PubChem CID: 702)Acetic acid (PubChem CID: 176) - اسید استیک (PubChem CID: 176)Formic acid (PubChem CID: 284) - اسید فرمیک (PubChem CID: 284)Nitric acid (PubChem CID: 944) - اسید نیتریک (PubChem CID: 944)Hydrochloric acid (PubChem CID: 313) - اسید هیدروکلریک (PubChem CID: 313)Radius - شعاعFormaldehyde (PubChem CID: 712) - فرمالدئید (PubChem CID: 712)Demineralized bone matrix - ماتریکس استخوان دمینرالیزه شدهpolymethylmethacrylate - پلی اتیل متاکریلاتCarbohydrate polymer - پلیمر کربوهیدراتChitosan (PubChem CID: 71853) - کیتوزان (PubChem CID: 71853)Chitosan - کیتوسان Glutaraldehyde (Pubchem CID: 3485) - گلوتارالدئید (Pubchem CID: 3485)Glycine (PubChem CID: 750) - گلیسین (PubChem CID: 750)
موضوعات مرتبط
مهندسی و علوم پایه
شیمی
شیمی آلی
پیش نمایش صفحه اول مقاله

چکیده انگلیسی
This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of xenogeneic demineralized bone matrix (DBM), chitosan (CS), and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) on the regeneration of the critical-sized radial bone defects in rats after eight weeks. Fifty bilateral radial bone defects were randomly divided into five groups including untreated defects and those treated with autograft, CS scaffold, PMMA, and DBM. The defects were evaluated by diagnostic imaging, histopathology, histomorphometry, scanning electron microscopy, and biomechanical testing. Compared with the defect, CS, and PMMA groups, the autograft and DBM treated defects showed significantly higher new bone formation, bone volume, ultimate mechanical strength, and stiffness, but significantly lower inflammatory cells, fibroblasts, fibrocytes, and strain. Moreover, DBM showed significantly superior biocompatibility, biodegradability, osteoconductivity, and osteoinductivity to the CS scaffold and PMMA. In conclusion, both CS and PMMA alone were non-biocompatible polymers with slow biodegradation which retarded bone regeneration, whereas DBM significantly improved bone healing close to the gold method. However CS was not osteoconductive or osteoinductive alone, it can be combined with other biomaterials and molecules considering the excellent properties of this carbohydrate biopolymer for bone healing and regeneration.
ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Carbohydrate Polymers - Volume 166, 15 June 2017, Pages 236-248
Journal: Carbohydrate Polymers - Volume 166, 15 June 2017, Pages 236-248
نویسندگان
Soodeh Alidadi, Ahmad Oryan, Amin Bigham-Sadegh, Ali Moshiri,