Periodontal repair in dogs: rhBMP‐2 significantly enhances bone formation under provisions for guided tissue regeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) has been shown to support the regeneration of alveolar bone and periodontal attachment in surgically created periodontal defects and in defects with a history of dental plaque and calculus exposure. Periodontal regeneration has also been shown following guided tissue regeneration using space-providing expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) devices. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of rhBMP-2 on regeneration of alveolar bone and periodontal attachment used in conjunction with a space-providing ePTFE device. METHODS: Routine, critical-size, 5-6 mm, supra-alveolar, periodontal defects were created around the third and fourth mandibular premolar teeth in four young adult Hound Labrador mongrel dogs. rhBMP-2 (0.2 mg/ml) in an absorbable collagen sponge (rhBMP-2/ACS) or buffer/ACS (control) implants were randomly assigned to be placed around the premolar teeth in the left and right jaw quadrants in subsequent animals. Space-providing ePTFE devices with 300-microm laser-drilled pores, 0.8 mm apart, were used to cover the rhBMP-2 and control implants. The gingival flaps were advanced for primary wound closure. The animals were euthanized at 8 weeks postsurgery for histologic and histometric analyses. RESULTS: Bone regeneration and ankylosis were significantly increased in jaw quadrants receiving rhBMP-2/ACS compared to control (bone height 4.8+/-0.3 versus 2.0+/-0.2 mm, p=0.001; bone area 10.9+/-1.3 versus 1.4+/-0.1 mm2; p=0.009, and ankylosis 2.2+/-0.2 versus 0.04+/-0.7 mm; p=0.01). No differences between groups were found for cementum regeneration and root resorption. CONCLUSIONS: rhBMP-2 significantly enhances regeneration of alveolar bone in conjunction with a space-providing, macroporous ePTFE device for GTR.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".