4.6 Article

Evaluation of bone healing following Er:YAG laser ablation in rat calvaria compared with bur drilling

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOPHOTONICS
Volume 12, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jbio.201800245

Keywords

bone; bone ablation; Er:YAG laser; microarray; micro-CT; wound healing

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [16K11825]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16K11825] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Er:YAG laser is currently used for bone ablation. However, the effect of Er:YAG laser irradiation on bone healing remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate bone healing following ablation by laser irradiation as compared with bur drilling. Rat calvarial bone was ablated using Er:YAG laser or bur with water coolant. Er:YAG laser effectively ablated bone without major thermal changes. In vivo micro-computed tomography analysis revealed that laser irradiation showed significantly higher bone repair ratios than bur drilling. Scanning electron microscope analysis showed more fibrin deposition on laser-ablated bone surfaces. Microarray analysis followed by gene set enrichment analysis revealed that IL6/JAK/STAT3 signaling and inflammatory response gene sets were enriched in bur-drilled bone at 6 hours, whereas the E2F targets gene set was enriched in laser-irradiated bone. Additionally, Hspala and Dmp1 expressions were increased and Sost expression was decreased in laser-irradiated bone compared with bur-drilled bone. In granulation tissue formed after laser ablation, Alpl and Gblap expressions increased compared to bur-drilled site. Immunohistochemistry showed that osteocalcin-positive area was increased in the laser-ablated site. These results suggest that Er:YAG laser might accelerate early new bone formation with advantageous surface changes and cellular responses for wound healing, compared with bur-drilling.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available