4.2 Article

Histopathological evaluation of the effect of systemic thymoquinone administration on healing of bone defects in rat tibia

Journal

BIOTECHNOLOGY & BIOTECHNOLOGICAL EQUIPMENT
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages 175-181

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13102818.2016.1257925

Keywords

Tymoquinone (TQ); systemic; rat tibia; bone defect

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of the present study was to assess the systemic effect of thymoquinone (TQ) on bone healing by starting TQ administration, either 40 days before, or on the day of the surgical procedure and continuing during the healing period of 28 days. Eighteen experimental rats were divided into three groups and defects were created in their tibias. The following procedures were performed for each group: Control group (C): No systemic drug administration (n D 6); Test group 1 (T1): Systemic TQ was administered daily starting 40 days before creation of the defect and additionally during the post-operative healing period of 28 days (n = 6); Test group 2 (T2): Systemic TQ was administered daily after creation of the defect and during the healing period of 28 days (n = 6). Quantitative measurement for new bone formation, osteoblast lining and semi-quantitative measurement of capillary intensities were examined and statistically analysed. There was a significant increase in the ratio of new bone per total defect area and new bone trabeculae lined by active osteoblasts in both test groups (T1 and T2) compared to control group (p < 0.05). However the difference between T1 and T2 was not statistically significant. TQ-administered groups also showed an increase in capillary intensity in the defect area compared to the control group (p < 0.05). Systemic administration of TQ either starting 40 days before or on the day of surgery accelerated new bone formation in a rat model and can be advocated as an adjunct to expedite bone healing.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available