In Vivo Regenerative Properties of Coralline‐Derived (Biocoral) Scaffold Grafts in Human Maxillary Defects: Demonstrative and Comparative Study with Beta‐Tricalcium Phosphate and Biphasic Calcium Phosphate by Synchrotron Radiation X‐Ray Microtomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been interest on the fabrication of systems using particulates or block-based approach for bone tissue engineering (TE) scaffolds, possessing porous interconnected structures. In fact, these particular morphologies greatly increase the surface area for more chemical and biological reactions to take place. PURPOSE: This study was designed to demonstrate the unique capability of the synchrotron radiation x-ray microtomography (micro-CT) in offering an advanced characterization of coralline-derived (Biocoral) biomaterials placed in human maxillary defects as it allows, in a nondestructive way, a complete, precise, and high-resolution three-dimensional analysis of their microstructural parameters. Moreover, the comparison between Biocoral and other biomaterials was explored to understand the mechanism of their biological behavior as bone substitute. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implant survival, bone regeneration, graft resorption, neovascularization, and morphometric parameters (including anisotropy and connectivity index of the structures) were evaluated by micro-CT in Biocoral and the other biomaterials after 6 to 7 months from implantation in human maxillary bone defects. RESULTS: After the in vivo tests, a huge amount of bone was detected in the retrieved Biocoral-based samples, coupled with a good rate of biomaterial resorption and the formation of a homogeneous and rich net of new vessels. The morphometric parameters were comparable to those obtained in the biphasic calcium phosphate-based control, with the exception of the connectivity index for which this control exhibited the most well-connected structure. This last result, together with those referred to the poor performances of the β-tricalcium phosphate block-based sample, suggests that the particular scaffold morphology may play a role in the hunt the optimal scaffold structure to be implanted. CONCLUSION: In this limited study, implant success rate seems not strictly dependent on the biomaterial that is used, but on the scaffold morphology. Micro-CT technique was demonstrated to play a fundamental role in advanced characterization of bone TE constructs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".