Loading…

A histomorphometric study of the effect of doxycycline and erythromycin on bone formation in dental alveolar socket of rat

The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether subantimicrobial doses of doxycycline (DOX) and erythromycin (EM) used for the treatment of peri-implant osteolysis due to their anti-osteoclastogenesis can interfere with the osseous wound healing process in rat alveolar socket. Forty-five male W...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Advanced biomedical research 2015, Vol.4 (1), p.71-71
Main Authors: Shahabooei, Mohammad, Razavi, Sayed Mohammad, Minaiyan, Mohsen, Birang, Reza, Behfarnia, Parichehr, Yaghini, Jaber, Naghsh, Narges, Ghalayani, Parichehr, Hajisadeghi, Samira
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether subantimicrobial doses of doxycycline (DOX) and erythromycin (EM) used for the treatment of peri-implant osteolysis due to their anti-osteoclastogenesis can interfere with the osseous wound healing process in rat alveolar socket. Forty-five male Wistar rats had their first maxillary right molar extracted and were divided into three groups. DOX and EM at the doses of 5 mg/kg/day orally (p.o.) and 2 mg/kg/day intraperitoneally (i.p.) were administered respectively to two separate groups for 7 days after operation. In the control group the animals received normal saline (5 ml/kg). Five rats were sacrificed at 7, 14 and 21 days post-extraction in each study group. A histomorphometric analysis was used to evaluate new bone formation inside the alveolar socket. Significant level was set at 0.05. The findings showed that the percentage of new bone formation (NBF) enhanced significantly on days 7 and 14. There was no significant difference in the NBF between DOX and EM groups. Short-term treatment with both DOX and EM enhanced new bone formation without any advances in favor of each drug.
ISSN:2277-9175
2277-9175
DOI:10.4103/2277-9175.153895