Periodontal repair in dogs: evaluation of a bioresorbable calcium phosphate cement (Ceredex<sup>TM</sup>) as a carrier for rhBMP‐2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) has been shown to induce clinically relevant bone formation for orthopedic, craniofacial, and oral indications. It appears critical, in particular for onlay indications, that the associated carrier technology exhibits structural integrity to offset compressive forces in support of rhBMP-2-induced bone formation. The objective of this study was to evaluate a calcium phosphate (CP) cement, Ceredex, as a candidate carrier for rhBMP-2 in a defect model with limited osteogenic potential. MATERIALS: Bilateral, critical size, 6-mm, supra-alveolar, periodontal defects were created in six, adult, male, Hound Labrador mongrels. Three animals received rhBMP-2/Ceredex (rhBMP-2 at 0.20 and 0.40 mg/ml) in contralateral defect sites (implant volume/defect approximately 1 ml). One defect site in each of the three remaining animals received Ceredex without rhBMP-2 (control). The animals were euthanized at 12 weeks postsurgery for histologic and histometric analysis. RESULTS: Mean induced bone height exceeded 80% of the defect height for supra-alveolar periodontal defects receiving rhBMP-2/Ceredex without major differences between rhBMP-2 concentrations compared with approximately 40% for the control. The newly formed bone, a mixture of lamellar and woven bone in fibrovascular tissue, circumscribed relatively large portions of the residual Ceredex biomaterial. Inflammatory lesions were associated with limited bone formation in some sites. From a periodontal perspective, sites receiving rhBMP-2/Ceredex exhibited increased cementum formation compared with control, but without a functionally oriented periodontal ligament, and increased ankylosis and root resorption. Control sites exhibited early wound failure and exposure, loss of the Ceredex biomaterial, and limited bone formation. CONCLUSIONS: The Ceredex CP cement appears a potentially promising carrier technology for rhBMP-2 onlay indications. However, a slow resorption rate may prevent its wider use. This study does not support use of the rhBMP-2/Ceredex combination for periodontal indications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".