Reconstruction of ulnar segmental detects with autograft and ceramic biomaterials-A scanning electron microscopic (SEM) study

Indian Journal of Animal Sciences

Volumn 70, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 276-278

  Singh, Surjeet ^a   Singh, Gaj Raj ^a   Kumar, Satish ^a   Maiti, S K ^a  

^a INDIAN VETERINARY RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (India)

Author keywords

Autograft; Bone defect; Ceramics; Rabbit; Scanning; Ulna

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034409369     PISSN: 03678318     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Alexander H, Parsons J R, Ricci J L, Bajpai P K and Weiss A B. 1987. Calcium based ceramics and composites in bone reconstruction. CRC Critical Reviews in Biocompatability 4:43-77.
2. Burwell R G. 1969. The fate of bone grafts. Recent Advances in Orthopaedics.pp. 115-207. (Ed.) Apley A G. Baltimore. Williams and Wilkins.
3. Cutright D E, Bhasker S M and Brody J M. 1972. Reaction of bone to tricalcium phosphate pellets. Oral Surgery 33: 850.
4. Ham A W and Gordon S. 1952. The origin of bone that forms in association with cancellous bone transplanted in muscle. British Journal of Plastic Surgery 5: 154-56
5. Maiti S K and Singh G R. 1998. Bone morphogenetic proteins-Novel regulators of bone formation. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 36: 237-44.
6. Shimazaki K and Mooney V. 1985. Comparative study of porous hydroxyapatite and tricalcium phosphate as bone substitute. Journal of Orthopaedics Research 3: 301.
7. Thompson N and Casson J A. 1970. Experimental inlay bone grafts to the jaw: A preliminary study in dogs. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 46: 341.
8. Uchida A, Nade S M I, McCartney E R and Ching W. 1984. A comparative study of three different ceramics. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 66-B: 269-75.
9. Urist M R. 1965. Bone formation by autoinduction. Science 150: 893-99.