| Title |
Effect of low-level laser therapy irradiation and Bio-Oss graft material on the osteogenesis process in rabbit calvarium defects: a double blind experimental study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lasers in Medical Science, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10103-013-1403-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amir Alireza Rasouli Ghahroudi, Amir Reza Rokn, Katayoun A. M. Kalhori, Afshin Khorsand, Alireza Pournabi, A. L. B. Pinheiro, Reza Fekrazad |
| Abstract |
This study aims to assess the effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) irradiation and Bio-Oss graft material on the osteogenesis process in the rabbit calvarium defects. Twelve white male New Zealand rabbits were included in this study. Four 8-mm diameter identical defects were prepared on each rabbit's calvarium. One site was left as an untreated control (C), the second site was filled with Bio-Oss (B), the third site was treated with laser irradiation (L), and the fourth site treated with Bio-Oss and laser irradiation (B + L). In the laser group, a diode laser (wavelength 810 nm, output power 300 mW, irradiation mode CW, energy density 4 J/cm2) was applied immediately after surgery and then one other day for the next 20 days. After 4 and 8 weeks, the animals were sacrificed and histological and histomorphometric examinations were performed and the data were subjected to Friedman and repeated measurements ANOVA tests. Significant differences were not found regarding inflammation severity, foreign body reactions, and vitality of newly formed bone on 4th and 8th week after operation. The mean amount of new bone was 15.83 and 18.5 % in the controls on the 4th and 8th week; 27.66 and 25.16 % in the laser-irradiated group; 35.0 and 41.83 % in Bio-Oss and 41.83 and 47.0 % in the laser + Bio-Oss treated specimens with significant statistical differences (p <0.05). Application of LLLT in combination with Bio-Oss® can promote bone healing. Therefore, LLLT may be clinically beneficial in promoting bone formation in skeletal defects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 23% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 17 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,181,583
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#558
of 1,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,953
of 200,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#12
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,304 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 200,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.