Bone Formation Following Implantation of Titanium Sponge Rods into Humeral Osteotomies in Dogs: A Histological and Histometrical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Titanium (Ti) is widely proven to enhance bone contact and growth on its surface. It is expected that bone defects could benefit from Ti to promote healing and to increase strength of the implanted area. PURPOSE: The present study aimed at comparing the potential of porous Ti sponge rods with synthetic hydroxyapatite (HA) for the healing of bone defects in a canine model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six mongrel dogs were submitted to three trephined osteotomies of 6.0 x 4.0 mm in one humerus and after 2 months another three osteotomies were performed in the contralateral humerus. A total of 36 defects were randomly filled either with Ti foam, particulate HA, or coagulum (control). The six animals were killed 4 months after the first surgery for histological and histometrical analysis. RESULTS: The Ti-foam surface was frequently found in intimate contact with new bone especially at the defect walls. Control sites showed higher amounts of newly formed bone at 2 months - Ti (p = 0.000) and HA (p = 0.009) - and 4 months when compared with Ti (p = 0.001). Differently from HA, the Ti foam was densely distributed across the defect area which rendered less space for bone growth in the latter's sites. The use of Ti foams or HA resulted in similar amounts of bone formation in both time intervals. Nevertheless, the presence of a Ti-foam rod preserved defect's marginal bone height as compared with control groups. Also, the Ti-foam group showed a more mature bone pattern at 4 months than HA sites. CONCLUSION: The Ti foam exhibited good biocompatibility, and its application resulted in improved maintenance of bone height compared with control sites. The Ti foam in a rod design exhibited bone ingrowth properties suitable for further exploration in other experimental situations.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".