Atalay, YusufBozkurt, Mehmet FatihGonul, YucelCakmak, OmerAgacayak, Kamil SerkanKose, IbrahimHazman, Omer2024-04-242024-04-2420151177-8881https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S80778https://hdl.handle.net/11468/18786Aim: 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.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAmlodipineCalcium Channel BlockersPlatelet-Rich PlasmaBone Mineral MetabolismHypertensionArticle919731981WOS:0003522841000012-s2.0-849292228612589720710.2147/DDDT.S80778Q1Q2