{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0342902711323764, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01036682615629984, 'mean_word_length': 4.947867298578199, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of Bone Formation After Grafting With Deproteinized Bovine Bone and Mineralized Allogenic Bone

Purpose:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of new bone formation of deproteinized bovine bone (Bio-Oss) and mineralized allogenic bone (Tutoplast). Materials and Methods:Sixty rats were divided into control and experimental groups (groups 1 and 2): control group, unfilled control; group 1, Bio-Oss; group 2, Tutoplast, respectively. The animals were killed after 6 and 12 weeks, and newly formed bone was analyzed histomorphometrically. Results:In the control group, some new bone formed in the rim of the defect area. In the group 1, newly formed bone was thinner than the adjacent normal bone, and Bio-Oss particles were observed. In the group 2, showed a pattern of gradual fusion with adjacent bone, as well as particles in some areas, similar to the Bio-Oss–treated group. In the 12-week groups, the amount of new bone formation was significantly higher in the experimental groups than in the control group, and it was significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1. Conclusion:Although Tutoplast and Bio-Oss graft materials seem to be useful for bone grafts, Tutoplast showed more active new bone formation than Bio-Oss.