Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.2147/DDDT.S80778 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.2147/DDDT.S80778 C4396585!4396585!25897207     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Drug+Des+Devel+Ther 2015 ; 9 (ä): 1973-81 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=25897207|t=2015. The effects of amlodipine and platelet rich plasma on bone healing in rats |pdf=|usr=}}{{25897207}} gab.com Text The effects of amlodipine and platelet rich plasma on bone healing in rats JO: Drug Des Devel Ther http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=25897207 #FOAvip Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of calcium channel blocker (CCB) amlodipine (AML), platelet rich plasma (PRP), and a mixture of both materials on bone healing. Materials and methods: Fifty-six male Wistar rats were randomly divided into four groups: group A, tibia defect model with no treatment; group B, tibia defect model treated with AML, 0.04 mg daily by oral gavage; group C, tibia defect model treated with local PRP; group D, tibia defect model treated with local PRP and AML, 0.04 mg daily by oral gavage. Results: At day 21, bone healing was significantly better in groups C and D compared to group A (P<0.05), but comparisons showed no statistically significant difference in group B (P>0.05). At day 30, groups B and C showed no statistically significant difference (P>0.05) compared to group A, but bone healing in group D was significantly better than in group A (P<0.05). Statistically, AML did not affect alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity at 21 and 30 days (P>0.05), but PRP and AML + PRP increased ALP activity statistically (P<0.05). Conclusion: It can be concluded that AML had neither a positive nor a negative effect on bone healing, but when used in combination with PRP, it may be beneficial. Twit Text FOAVip The effects of amlodipine and platelet rich plasma on bone healing in rats ????Drug Des Devel Ther http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=25897207 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=25897207 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|25897207}}</ref> The effects of amlodipine and platelet rich plasma on bone healing in rats #MMPMID25897207 Atalay Y; Bozkurt MF; Gonul Y; Cakmak O; Agacayak KS; Köse I; Hazman O; Keles H; Turamanlar O; Eroglu M Drug Des Devel Ther 2015[]; 9 (ä): 1973-81 PMID25897207show ga Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of calcium channel blocker (CCB) amlodipine (AML), platelet rich plasma (PRP), and a mixture of both materials on bone healing. Materials and methods: Fifty-six male Wistar rats were randomly divided into four groups: group A, tibia defect model with no treatment; group B, tibia defect model treated with AML, 0.04 mg daily by oral gavage; group C, tibia defect model treated with local PRP; group D, tibia defect model treated with local PRP and AML, 0.04 mg daily by oral gavage. Results: At day 21, bone healing was significantly better in groups C and D compared to group A (P<0.05), but comparisons showed no statistically significant difference in group B (P>0.05). At day 30, groups B and C showed no statistically significant difference (P>0.05) compared to group A, but bone healing in group D was significantly better than in group A (P<0.05). Statistically, AML did not affect alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity at 21 and 30 days (P>0.05), but PRP and AML + PRP increased ALP activity statistically (P<0.05). Conclusion: It can be concluded that AML had neither a positive nor a negative effect on bone healing, but when used in combination with PRP, it may be beneficial. äThe effects of amlodipine and platelet rich plasma on bone healing in (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing