{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02457865168539326, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0056179775280898875, 'mean_word_length': 5.038135593220339, '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}}
The histological study of osseous regeneration following implantation of various bone graft biomaterials.

BACKGROUND
While various biomaterials are used for bone regeneration, the relative comparative efficiency of them has not been thoroughly investigated.


PURPOSE
This study evaluated histopathological events during osseous healing after implantation of following bone grafts: Demineralized freeze-dried cortical bone powder (DFDB), natural coral implants, calcium sulfate-based putty containing demineralized bone matrix (CaS-DBM), and pure-phase beta tricalcium phosphate ceramic granules (β-TCP).


MATERIALS AND METHODS
Fifty-six Wistar Albino rats were used for this study. The postimplantation osseous healing was evaluated at 3rd, 6th weeks after the operation.


RESULTS
DFDB did not induce bone formation in 3 weeks period, but it showed a highly osteoinductive effect at the end of 6th week period. The effects of coral implants on bone formation both at 3 and 6 weeks period were much higher than the DFDB. CaS-DBM showed higher bone formation than β-TCP at 3rd, 6th weeks. It was found that coral and CaS-DBM had a more beneficial impact on early bone healing compared to β-TCP and DFDB. All these graft biomaterials are useable in human bone defects. The main difference in the ossous healing properties of these materials is observed early postimplantation with the delayed healing outcome being similar.