The Influence of PRP on Early Bone Formation in Membrane Protected Defects. A Histological and Histomorphometric Study in the Rabbit Calvaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Platelet rich plasma (PRP) has been proposed to be a useful adjunct to bone grafting. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to assess new bone formation in bone regeneration procedures using platelet rich plasma (PRP) alone or in combination with autogenous bone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four surgically created, monocortical defects 5 mm in diameter in the calvariae of 15 New Zealand rabbits were grafted with a coagulum-filled control, PRP, particulated autogenous bone alone (A), or combined with PRP (A-PRP). RESULTS: Mean platelet concentration of 1,761,930 ± 680,200/µl was achieved (5.30 ± 2.63 × fold of baseline). Animals were sacrificed 1, 2, and 4 weeks later. Histomorphometric analysis showed no statistical difference for total new bone formation at any time point, however, a detailed analysis revealed a statistically significant higher percentage of lamellar bone than woven bone for the autogenous bone group at 2 weeks; all other groups demonstrated equal percentages of either bone type. At 4 weeks, all groups revealed a statistically greater component of lamellar bone over woven bone. Graft resorption rate was similar for both A and A-PRP. PRP platelet concentration was significantly positively correlated with TGF-beta1 but not with PDGF-AB. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the chosen animal model, this study demonstrated that PRP during early healing, whether alone or mixed with autogenous bone, did not lead to greater bone remodelling, as compared to coagulum. In contrast, autogenous bone alone demonstrated accelerated bone remodelling at 2 weeks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".