Periodontal repair in dogs: effect of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐12 (rhBMP‐12) on regeneration of alveolar bone and periodontal attachment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) has been shown to stimulate alveolar bone and cementum formation in periodontal defects but not a functionally oriented periodontal ligament (PDL). Subcutaneous and intramuscular implants of BMP-12 have been shown to induce tendon formation and ligament-like tissue. The objective of this study was to evaluate rhBMP-12 for periodontal regeneration, in particular PDL formation. METHODS: Six young adult Hound Labrador mongrel dogs were used. Routine supraalveolar periodontal defects were created around the mandibular premolar teeth. Three animals received rhBMP-12(0.04 mg/ml) in an absorbable collagen sponge (ACS) carrier vs. rhBMP-12(0.2 mg/mL)/ACS in contralateral defects. Three animals received rhBMP-12(1.0 mg/ml)/ACS vs. rhBMP-2(0.2 mg/ml)/ACS (total implant volume/defect approximately 1 ml). The animals were euthanized 8 weeks postsurgery and block biopsies were processed for histometric analysis. RESULTS: Bone regeneration appeared increased in sites receiving rhBMP-2/ACS compared to sites receiving rhBMP-12/ACS. Cementum regeneration was similar comparing sites implanted with rhBMP-2/ACS to sites implanted with rhBMP-12/ACS. In contrast, sites receiving rhBMP-12/ACS exhibited a functionally oriented PDL bridging the gap between newly formed bone and cementum whereas this was a rare observation in sites receiving rhBMP-2/ACS. Ankylosis appeared increased in sites receiving rhBMP-2/ACS compared to those receiving rhBMP-12/ACS. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of this study suggest that rhBMP-12 may have significant effects on regeneration of the PDL. Additional preclinical evaluation is needed to confirm these initial observations prior to clinical application.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".