Literature DB >> 22244630

Effect of guided tissue regeneration on newly formed bone and cementum in periapical tissue healing after endodontic surgery: an in vivo study in the cat.

Zvi Artzi1, Nadav Wasersprung, Miron Weinreb, Marius Steigmann, Hari S Prasad, Igor Tsesis.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of anorganic bovine bone as a grafted biomaterial on newly formed bone and cementum in periapical regions after surgical endodontic treatment in cats.
METHODS: After inducing apical periodontitis in 9 cats, root canal and surgical endodontic treatment were performed on 72 roots of first and second maxillary premolars. Bone defects were treated with biomaterial particles + a membrane, biomaterial only, a membrane only, or left unfilled (control). Histomorphometry on nondecalcified sections were performed at 3 and 6 months after surgery. Analysis of variance with repeated measures was used within 2 and 3 subject factors to analyze newly formed bone, cementum, biomaterial conduction, and resorption.
RESULTS: At each time period, bone formation was greater at the grafted membrane-protected sites than in the grafted-unprotected sites. At 6 months, the bone area fraction at membrane nongrafted sites was greater than in the grafted-protected sites. The new cementum was significantly greater at 6 months than at 3 months and greater at the grafted membrane-protected sites over the unprotected ones at 6 months. Statistically, the grafted biomaterial, the membrane, and the time contributed significantly to the amount of new bone (P<.05) with no significant interaction. Biomaterial osteoconduction was significantly affected by the time. All 3 variables showed a significant interaction on new cementum.
CONCLUSIONS: There was significantly more bone formation after surgical endodontic treatment when membrane and bone grafts were used as compared with bone grafts only or unfilled control sites. However, it appears that the key factor to the enhanced tissue regeneration is the membrane and not the grafted biomaterial.
Copyright © 2012 American Association of Endodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22244630     DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.10.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endod        ISSN: 0099-2399            Impact factor:   4.171


  4 in total

Review 1.  Biomaterials in periapical regeneration after microsurgical endodontics: A narrative review.

Authors:  Paloma Montero-Miralles; Rafael Ibáñez-Barranco; Daniel Cabanillas-Balsera; Victoria Areal-Quecuty; Benito Sánchez-Domínguez; Jenifer Martín-González; Juan J Segura-Egea; María C Jiménez-Sánchez
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2021-09-01

2.  Histomorphometric Comparison between Two Types of Acellular Dermal Matrix Grafts: A Mini Pig Animal Model Study.

Authors:  Javier Aragoneses; Ana Suárez; Cinthia Rodríguez; Juan Manuel Aragoneses
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 3.390

3.  Strontium promotes cementoblasts differentiation through inhibiting sclerostin expression in vitro.

Authors:  Xingfu Bao; Xianjun Liu; Yi Zhang; Yue Cui; Jindan Yao; Min Hu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-06-09       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Hydrophilicity, Viscoelastic, and Physicochemical Properties Variations in Dental Bone Grafting Substitutes.

Authors:  Branko Trajkovski; Matthias Jaunich; Wolf-Dieter Müller; Florian Beuer; Gregory-George Zafiropoulos; Alireza Houshmand
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.623

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.