Hyaluronan Supports Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein‐2 Induced Bone Reconstruction of Advanced Alveolar Ridge Defects in Dogs. A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prosthetic-driven implant dentistry requires predictable procedures for alveolar ridge augmentation. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate bone regeneration in mandibular, full-thickness, alveolar ridge, saddle-type defects following surgical implantation of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) in a novel hyaluronan (HY) sponge carrier. This sponge was fabricated from auto-crosslinked HY. METHODS: Alveolar ridge defects (approximately 15 x 10 x 10 mm), 2 per jaw quadrant, were surgically prepared in each of 3 young adult American fox hounds. Four defects were immediately implanted with rhBMP-2/HY. Three defects were implanted with rhBMP-2 in an absorbable collagen sponge (ACS) carrier (positive control). The rhBMP-2 solution (1.5 ml at 0.2 mg/ml) was soak-loaded onto the HY and ACS sponges. Three defects were implanted with HY sponges soak-loaded with buffer without rhBMP-2 (negative control), while 2 defects served as surgical controls. The animals were euthanized at 12 weeks postsurgery for histometric analysis. RESULTS: Clinically, alveolar ridge defects receiving rhBMP-2/ACS exhibited a slight supracrestal expansion, while defects receiving rhBMP-2/HY were filled to contour. In contrast, the HY and surgical controls exhibited ridge collapse. rhBMP-2/HY-treated defects exhibited a dense bone quality without radiolucent regions observed in defects treated with rhBMP-2/ACS. The histometric analysis showed 100% bone fill for the rhBMP-2/ACS defects and 94%, 58%, and 65% bone fill for the rhBMP-2/HY, HY, and surgical control defects, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The conclusions are based on data from 2 of 3 animals in the study. In one animal, no response to rhBMP-2 was observed with either carrier, and the animal may have been a non-responder of unknown nature. With this limitation, the observations herein suggest that: 1) HY supports significant bone induction by rhBMP-2; 2) the rhBMP-2-induced bone assumes qualities of the immediate resident bone; 3) HY alone exhibits no apparent osteoconductive potential; and 4) HY appears to resorb within a 12-week healing interval in the absence or presence of rhBMP-2. Thus, HY appears to be a suitable candidate carrier for rhBMP-2.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".