5 research outputs found

    Evaluation of the time-dependent osteogenic activity of glycerol incorporated magnesium oxide nanoparticles in induced calvarial defects

    No full text
    Introduction: Magnesium-based biomaterials have been explored for their potential as bone healing materials, as a result of their outstanding biodegradability and biocompatibility. These characteristics make magnesium oxide nanoparticles (MgO NPs) a promising material for treating bone disorders. The purpose of this investigation is to assess the osteogenic activity of newly-developed locally administered glycerol-incorporated MgO NPs (GIMgO NPs) in rabbits’ calvarial defects. Materials and methods: Characterization of GIMgO was done by X-ray Diffraction (XRD) and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). Bilateral calvarial defects were created in eighteen New Zealand Rabbits, of which they were divided into 3 groups with time points corresponding to 2, 4, and 6 weeks postoperatively (n = 6). One defect was implanted with absorbable gel foam impregnated with GIMgO NPs while the other was implanted with gel foam soaked with glycerol (the control). The defects were assessed using histological, Micro-Computed Tomography (Micro-CT), and histometric evaluation. Results: The characterization of the GIMgO nanogel revealed the presence of MgO NPs and glycerol as well as the formation of the crystalline phase of the MgO NPs within the nanogel sample. The histological and micro-CT analysis showed time-dependent improvement of healing activity in the calvarial defects implanted with GIMgO NPs when compared to the control. Furthermore, the histometric analysis demonstrated a marked increase in the total area of new bone, connective tissue, new bone area and volume in the GIMgO NPs implanted site. Statistically, the amount of new bone formation was more significant at 6 weeks than at 2 and 4 weeks postoperatively in the calvarial defects implanted with GIMgO NPs as compared to the control. Conclusion: The locally applied GIMgO NPs demonstrated efficacy in promoting bone formation, with more significant effects observed over an extended period. These findings suggest its suitability for clinical use as a therapeutic alternative to enhance bone healing

    Water distribution in dentin matrices: Bound vs. unbound water

    No full text
    Objective. This work measured the amount of bound versus unbound water in completely-demineralized dentin.Methods. Dentin beams prepared from extracted human teeth were completely demineralized, rinsed and dried to constant mass. They were rehydrated in 41% relative humidity (RH), while gravimetrically measuring their mass increase until the first plateau was reached at 0.064 (vacuum) or 0.116 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). The specimens were then exposed to 60% RH until attaining the second plateau at 0.220 (vacuum) or 0.191 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite), and subsequently exposed to 99% RH until attaining the third plateau at 0.493 (vacuum) or 0.401 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite).Results. Exposure of the first layer of bound water to 0% RH for 5 min produced a -0.3% loss of bound water; in the second layer of bound water it caused a -3.3% loss of bound water; in the third layer it caused a -6% loss of bound water. Immersion in 100% ethanol or acetone for 5 min produced a 2.8 and 1.9% loss of bound water from the first layer, respectively; it caused a -4 and -7% loss of bound water in the second layer, respectively; and a -17 and -23% loss of bound water in the third layer. Bound water represented 21-25% of total dentin water. Chemical dehydration of water-saturated dentin with ethanol/acetone for 1 min only removed between 25 and 35% of unbound water, respectively.Signcance. Attempts to remove bound water by evaporation were not very successful. Chemical dehydration with 100% acetone was more successful than 100% ethanol especially the third layer of bound water. Since unbound water represents between 75 and 79% of total matrix water, the more such water can be removed, the more resin can be infiltrated. (C) 2014 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
    corecore