Evaluation of light-emitting diode photobiomodulation on bone healing of rat calvarial defects

Figures & data

Table 1. Distribution of the rats in the study.

Groups	Sacrification (days)	Light	Biomaterial	n
	8	LED	MinerOss®	7
Group I	8	LED	–	7
	15	LED	MinerOss®	7
	15	LED	–	7
	8	–	MinerOss®	7
Group II	8	–	–	7
	15	–	MinerOss®	7
	15	–	–	7

Note: Number of the rats (n).

Table 2. Allen's fracture of healing scoring system.

Healing staging	Score
Non-union	0
Incomplete cartilage union	1
Complete cartilage union	2
Incomplete bony union with phase of ossification	3
Incomplete bony union with intermediate phase of ossification	4
Incomplete bony union with late phase of ossification	5
Complete bony union	6

Table 3. Comparison of bone healing, inflammation, necrosis and fibrosis values of 8th day sacrification groups.

		Group I	Group II
		Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	P
	Bone healing	0 ± 0	0 ± 0	1
Grafted side n: 7	Inflammation	2 ± 0.82	2 ± 1.15	0.84
	Necrosis	0.43 ± 0.53	0.29 ± 0.49	0.591
	Fibrosis	0.86 ± 0.38	1.57 ± 0.79	0.035*
	Bone healing	1.85 ± 0.69	0 ± 0	0.001*
Non-grafted side n: 7	Inflammation	0.57 ± 0.79	1.86 ± 0.89	0.020*
	Necrosis	0 ± 0	0.29 ± 0.48	0.141
	Fibrosis	1.57 ± 0.53	1.71 ± 076	0.775

Note: Number of the rats (n). In the grafted side, there was a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of fibrosis in favor of Group 1.In the non-grafted side, there was a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of bone healing and inflammation with Group 1 exhibiting better bone healing and statistically lower inflammation values.

*P < 0.05.

Table 4. Comparison of bone healing, inflammation, necrosis and fibrosis values of 15th day sacrification groups.

		Group I	Group II
		Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	P
	Bone healing	2.43 ± 0.53	1.75 ± 0.70	0.065
Grafted side n: 7	Inflammation	1.57 ± 0.53	0.63 ± 0.74	0.023*
	Necrosis	0.29 ± 0.49	0 ± 0	0.117
	Fibrosis	1.86 ± 0.37	1.50 ± 0.53	0.157
	Bone healing	2.28 ± 0.49	1.25 ± 0.46	0.004*
Non-grafted side n: 7	Inflammation	0.43 ± 0.53	0.50 ± 0.53	0.789
	Necrosis	0.14 ± 0.37	0 ± 0	0.285
	Fibrosis	1.29 ± 0.49	1.50 ± 0.53	0.414

Note: Number of the rats (n). In the grafted side, there was a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of inflammation with Group 2 exhibiting lower inflammation values.In the non-grafted side, there was a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of bone healing with Group 1 exhibiting better bone healing.

*P < 0.05.

Figure 1. Seventh day grafted defect with LPT in Group I.

Note: Newly formed bone tissue comprising thin trabecular structure in connective tissue with rich neovascularization around graft material (H&E × 200)

Figure 2. Seventh day empty defect with LPT in Group I.

Note: New bone trabecules in active connective tissue, which consist of young mesenchymal stem cells (H&E × 200)

Figure 3. Seventh day grafted defect in Group II.

Note: Ice band like reticular bone formation around graft material (H&E × 200)

Figure 4. Seventh day empty defect in Group II.

Note: New bone formation from defect border through fibrous tissue (H&E × 200)

Figure 5. Fourteenth day grafted defect with LPT in Group I.

Note: Bridge-like new bone formation covering the defect (H&E × 200)

Figure 6. Fourteenth day empty defect with LPT in Group I.

Note: New bone trabeculae filling half of the defect in the fibrous tissue (H&E × 200)

Figure 7. Fourteenth day grafted defect in Group II.

Note: New bone trabeculae around graft material (H&E × 200)

Figure 8. Fourteenth day empty defect in Group II.

Note: New bone trabeculae developing from border through the centre of the defect (H&E × 100)