Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2019
Imaging and histomorphometric evaluation of mandible and tibia of rats treated with bisphosphonates.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martelli Stephanie Joana Roman, Damian Melissa Feres, Schinestsck André Ribeiro, Schuch Lauren Frenzel, Cascaes Andreia Morales, Vasconcelos Ana Carolina Uchoa
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the mandible and tibia of rats treated with bisphosphonates (BPs) by imaging and histomorphometric analysis.
STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-four rat specimens (Rattus norvegicus, Wistar strain) were distributed into 3 groups: (1) 12 rats treated with zoledronic acid; (2) 12 rats treated with clodronate; and (3) the control group, containing 10 rats that received saline. All bones were exposed to cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). The images were analyzed to determine bone density (BD), using the software OsiriX 7.0. Histological slides were prepared from the specimens and the proportion of bone volume (BV) was quantified using the software Adobe Photoshop CC.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in BD either between the drug groups or between mandible and tibia. BV between BPs and control group did not show a significant difference. However, comparing the two bones, the mandibles in the control group displayed higher BV than did the tibiae in the same group.
CONCLUSION: According to our results, we conclude that (1) BD was not altered by bone type or by type of BP administered, and (2) treatment with zoledronic acid or clodronate did not affect BV in the mandible or tibia of test groups.
STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-four rat specimens (Rattus norvegicus, Wistar strain) were distributed into 3 groups: (1) 12 rats treated with zoledronic acid; (2) 12 rats treated with clodronate; and (3) the control group, containing 10 rats that received saline. All bones were exposed to cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). The images were analyzed to determine bone density (BD), using the software OsiriX 7.0. Histological slides were prepared from the specimens and the proportion of bone volume (BV) was quantified using the software Adobe Photoshop CC.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in BD either between the drug groups or between mandible and tibia. BV between BPs and control group did not show a significant difference. However, comparing the two bones, the mandibles in the control group displayed higher BV than did the tibiae in the same group.
CONCLUSION: According to our results, we conclude that (1) BD was not altered by bone type or by type of BP administered, and (2) treatment with zoledronic acid or clodronate did not affect BV in the mandible or tibia of test groups.