Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼º°ßÀÇ °ñ°á¼ÕºÎ¿¡¼­ 3Á¾ÀÇ ÁöÇ÷Á¦°¡ °ñÀç»ý¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ

Effects of hemostatic agents on osseous regeneration

´ëÇѱ¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¿Ü°úÇÐȸÁö 1996³â 22±Ç 1È£ p.101 ~ 111
±è¿µ¿î, À̿˱Ô, ÃÖÈ«¶õ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
±è¿µ¿î (  ) - Àü³²´ëÇб³
À̿˱Ԡ(  ) - Àü³²´ëÇб³
ÃÖÈ«¶õ (  ) - Àü³²´ëÇб³

Abstract


This study was done to evaluate the effects of commonly-used hemostatic agents on bone regeneration Histopathological and radiographical examinations were done to determine the degree of bone healing.
The dogs weighing average of 15kg , were used, and four surgical defects sized 1(1(1cm were created at the iliac crest. Surgicel, Amicar and Beriplast were placed in each three surgical defects. The animals were sacrificed at 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks
after
operation.
@ES Results obtained were as follows:
@EN 1. At 2 weeks, every operation site showed a radiopacity only slightly less than that of normal unaffected bone, and the site that contained Amicar had lowest radiopacity among the experimental groups.
2. At 4-8 weeks, radiopacity in every experimental group was similar to that of normal bone.
3. At 2 weeks, there was no evidence of remnant hemostatic agents through the absorption process in histopathological finding.
4. At 4-8 weeks, there was no difference in histopathological finding among the groups. Bone healing was good in every experimental group. In Beriplast group, bone healing was slightly faster than others.
These results suggest that three hemostatic agents have no differnece in affecting the progression of healing the bony defects when compare to control group.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed