English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Objectives  Chronic liver disease increases the risk for periodontal disease and osteoporotic fractures, but its impacts on bone regeneration remain unknown. Herein, we studied the impact of liver cirrhosis on peri‐implant bone formation.    Material and Methods  A total of 20 male Wistar rats were randomly divided into two groups: one with the common bile duct ligated (BDL) and the respective sham‐treated control group (SHAM). After four weeks of disease induction, titanium mini‐screws were inserted into the tibia. Successful induction of liver cirrhosis was confirmed by the presence of clinical symptoms. Another four weeks later, peri‐implant bone volume per tissue volume (BV/TV) and bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) were determined by histomorphometric analysis.    Results  Peri‐implant bone formation was not significantly different between the SHAM and BDL groups. In the cortical compartment, the median percentage of peri‐implant new bone was 10.1% (95% CI of mean 4.0–35.7) and 22.5% (13.8–30.6) in the SHAM and BDL groups, respectively ( p  = .26). Consistently, the new bone in direct contact with the implant was 18.1% (0.4–37.8) and 23.3% (9.2–32.8) in SHAM and BDL groups, respectively ( p  = .38). When measuring the medullary compartment, the new bone area was 7.1% (4.8–10.4) and 10.4% (7.2–13.5) in the SHAM and BDL groups, respectively ( p  = .17). Medullary new bone in direct contact with the implant was 10.0% (1.2–50.4) and 20.6% (16.8–35.3) in SHAM and BDL groups, respectively, and thus comparable between the two groups ( p  = .46).    Conclusions  Bile duct ligation has no significant impact on the early stages of peri‐implant bone formation.

Bone healing around titanium implants in a preclinical model of bile duct ligation‐induced liver injury