Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://repositorio.ufpa.br/jspui/handle/2011/6488
metadata.dc.type: Artigo de Periódico
Issue Date: Feb-2015
metadata.dc.creator: SILVA, Priscilla Flores
BRITO, Marcus Vinicius Henriques
PONTES, Flávia Sirotheau Corrêa
RAMOS, Suzana Rodrigues
MENDES, Laís Cordeiro
OLIVEIRA, Louize Caroline Marques
metadata.dc.description.affiliation: SILVA, P. F.; PONTES, F. S. C.; MENDES, L. C.; OLIVEIRA, L. C. M. Universidade Federal do Pará
Title: Copaiba oil effect on experimental jaw defect in Wistar rats
Citation: SILVA, Priscilla Flores et al. Copaiba oil effect on experimental jaw defect in Wistar rats. Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira, São Paulo, v. 30, n. 2, p. 120-126, Feb. 2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502015002000006. Disponível em: http://repositorio.ufpa.br/jspui/handle/2011/6488. Acesso em:.
Abstract: PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of copaiba oil on jaw defects repair in Wistar rats treated with bioglass or adipose tissue. METHODS: A jaw defect was randomly created in forty-two rats and filled with bioglass or adipose tissue. The two groups (Gbio and Gcell) were subdivided in three subgroups with seven animals each according to gavage administration: control (distillated water), oil (copaiba oil) and melox (meloxicam). Euthanasia was performed after forty post-operative days. The bone formation was analyzed regarding the histological aspects. RESULTS: The osteoclasts activity was observed only in four subgroups (p=0.78). Regarding the osteoblasts presence, it was very similar between the subgroups, the difference was due to Gcell-melox (p=0.009) that presented less osteoblastic activity. The inflammatory cells were more evident in Gcell-melox subgroup, however, there was no difference in comparison with the other subgroups (p=0.52). Bone formation was observed in all subgroups, just two animals showed no bone formation even after 40 days. More than 50% of bone matrix mineralization was observed in 56% (23 animals) of the analyzed areas. The bone matrix mineralization was not different between subgroups (p=0.60). CONCLUSIONS: The subgroups that received copaiba oil showed bone repair, although not statistically significant in comparison to subgroups treated whit meloxicam or controls. Copaiba oil administered by gavage had no effect on bone repair in this experimental model.
Keywords: Plantas medicinais
Óleo de copaíba
Regeneração óssea
Anti-inflamatórios
Rato como animal de laboratório
Plants
Medicinal
Bone regeneration
Anti-Inflammatory agents
Series/Report no.: Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
ISSN: 1678-2674
Publisher: Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia
metadata.dc.publisher.initials: SOBRADPEC
metadata.dc.rights: Acesso Aberto
metadata.dc.source.uri: http://ref.scielo.org/t7654c
metadata.dc.identifier.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502015002000006
Appears in Collections:Artigos Científicos - FOUFPA/ICS

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Article_CopaibaOilEffect.pdf654,17 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons