The comparative study of guided bone regeneration using various of bone graft materials

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the superficial bony healing after guided bony regeneration using a various bone grafts. Four types of bone grafts were performed by one oral and maxillofacial surgeon to restore the defects around endosseous implants. Group 1 included the allografts using Regenaform(R). Group 2 included the autograft. Group 3 included the combined grafts using with autogenous symphysis bone and xenograft(BioOss(R)). Group 4 included the xenograft(BioOss(R)). After some heling period, superficial bone biopsy was performed with the surgical blade(#15) during the second surgery. Histologic and histomorphmetric examination were carried out by one pathologist. There was the most new bone formation in the group 3, next group 2. However, there were no statistically significant differences. All group except for group 4 showed favorable bone formation and remodeling.

Sinus bone graft using combination of autogenous bone and BioOss(R): comparison of healing according to the ratio of autogenous bone

We performed sinus bone graft using some amount of autogenous bone and BioOss(R) and covered the sinus window with Ossix(R) membrane in these case series. After 4 to 6 months after operation, histopathologic examinations of trephine core biopsy showed following results. 1. There were bone density of 39.2 percent to 41.2 percent four months after operation, and we could observe the favorable early new bone formation. 2. Active bony remodeling of woven and lamellar bone was observed during 4 to 6 months healing period. 3. There were no significant differences between two groups. And also there were no significant differences between 4 months and 6 months.

Effects of Propofol and Halothane on Cerebral Metabolism and Brain Histopathologic Change Following Complete Cerebral Ischemia in Diabetic Rabbit / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: Because propofol has cerebral effects similar to barbiturates, it is postulated that propofol might offer more protection than halothane during cerebral ischemia. But there is no consistent data on the protective difference between these two agents. So this study was done to evaluate the cerebral protective effect of propofol and halothane on the diabetic model which is more susceptible to ischemic insult. METHODS: Twenty diabetic rabbits were anesthetized with 1% halothane in O2 and N2O. In propofol group (n=10), halothane was discontinued and intravenous infusion of 1% propofol was started (loading dose: 1.6 mg/kg/min, maintenance dose: 1.2 mg/kg/min) and the remainder rabbits served as halothane group (n=10). Thirty minutes after propofol infusion (same waiting interval in halothane group) cerebral ischemia was produced by combination of around neck tourniquet inflation and systemic hypotension for 10 minutes. Periischemic vital signs, arterial and internal jugular venous gas analysis, glucose and lactate concentrations were measured. Brain histopathologic examination was done with light microscope after reperfusion. RESULTS: The vital signs, glucose concentrations, arterial blood gas analysis and brain histopathologic examnination were not differed between these two groups in periischemic period. During the reperfusion period, the venous blood pH, PCO2, oxygen contents and lactate concentrations were more rapidly returned to preischemic value in propofol group. Also the arterial blood pH and arteriovenous oxygen content differences were more rapidly returned to preischemic value in propofol group during the reperfusion period. CONCLUSIONS: This results suggest that propofol has more cerebral protective effect from complete cerebral ischemia in diabetic rabbit compared to halothane.