Egyptian propolis compared to nanohydroxyapatite graft in the treatment of class II furcation defects in dogs

20Citations
Citations of this article
62Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Complementary and alternative medicine approaches are gaining ground in everyday practice. Propolis is a bee product that has been suggested to have bone regenerative effects. This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of Egyptian propolis with nanohydroxyapatite graft on furcation defect regeneration in mongrel dogs. Methods: A split mouth design was utilized in six clinically healthy mongrel dogs. A total of 24 Class II furcation defects were surgically created in mandibular third and fourth premolars. The defects on the right side were filled with nanohydroxyapatite graft and covered with collagen membrane, while on the left side the defects were filled with propolis and also covered with collagen membrane. The dogs were sacrificed after 1 and 3 months. Segments containing the defects were prepared for histological evaluation. Results: The histological evaluation after one month revealed newly formed bone in both treatment groups. However, after 3 months, the bone trabeculae appeared thinner in the collagen/nanohydroxyapatite group than in the collagen/propolis group. The histomorphometric evaluation showed a significant increase in bone height as well as bone surface area for the collagen/propolis group compared to collagen/ nanohydroxyapatite group. Conclusions: Both Egyptian propolis and nanohydroxyapatite graft material showed favorable periodontal regenerative effect. Propolis showed increased cellular proliferative ability that could be beneficial in reducing the healing period needed after periodontal therapy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zohery, A. A., Meshri, S. M., Madi, M. I., Abd El Rehim, S. S., & Nour, Z. M. (2018). Egyptian propolis compared to nanohydroxyapatite graft in the treatment of class II furcation defects in dogs. Journal of Periodontology, 89(11), 1340–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.17-0685

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free