PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate bone healing after the use of a xenograft scaffold enriched with bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs), an autogenous bone graft, or the scaffold without BM-MSCs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen rabbits were used for this study; bilateral 12-mm-diameter defects were created in the animals' parietal bones. The bilateral defects were filled with a xenograft enriched with BM-MSCs (test group [TG]), with autogenous bone graft (positive control group [PCG]), or with a xenograft alone (negative control group [NCG]). In all groups, randomly, one defect was covered with a collagen membrane. The rabbits were sacrificed 8 weeks after surgery, and their parietal bones were harvested and analyzed histomorphometrically. RESULTS: Within the PCG and the NCG, the defects covered with the barrier membrane showed better bone healing. In the TG, the defects covered with the barrier membrane did not show better bone healing (intragroup comparisons by Wilcoxon and Friedman tests for paired data). TG showed percentage of mineralized tissue (MT) of 56.03% ± 3.49% with membrane and 57.71% ± 5.31% without membrane. PCG showed MT of 55.13% ± 4.83% and 49.69% ± 3.81% with and without membrane, respectively, and NCG showed MT of 26.77% ± 7.29% and 19.67% ± 2.66% with and without membrane, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both autogenous bone graft and a xenograft enriched with BM-MSCs were equally effective for bone reconstruction and better than the xenograft alone. The use of a barrier membrane seemed to have a synergistic effect on bone healing in PCG and NCG but not in TG.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate bone healing after the use of a xenograft scaffold enriched with bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs), an autogenous bone graft, or the scaffold without BM-MSCs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen rabbits were used for this study; bilateral 12-mm-diameter defects were created in the animals' parietal bones. The bilateral defects were filled with a xenograft enriched with BM-MSCs (test group [TG]), with autogenous bone graft (positive control group [PCG]), or with a xenograft alone (negative control group [NCG]). In all groups, randomly, one defect was covered with a collagen membrane. The rabbits were sacrificed 8 weeks after surgery, and their parietal bones were harvested and analyzed histomorphometrically. RESULTS: Within the PCG and the NCG, the defects covered with the barrier membrane showed better bone healing. In the TG, the defects covered with the barrier membrane did not show better bone healing (intragroup comparisons by Wilcoxon and Friedman tests for paired data). TG showed percentage of mineralized tissue (MT) of 56.03% ± 3.49% with membrane and 57.71% ± 5.31% without membrane. PCG showed MT of 55.13% ± 4.83% and 49.69% ± 3.81% with and without membrane, respectively, and NCG showed MT of 26.77% ± 7.29% and 19.67% ± 2.66% with and without membrane, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both autogenous bone graft and a xenograft enriched with BM-MSCs were equally effective for bone reconstruction and better than the xenograft alone. The use of a barrier membrane seemed to have a synergistic effect on bone healing in PCG and NCG but not in TG.
Authors: Lara Schorn; Tim Fienitz; Maximilian F Gerstenberg; Anja Sterner-Kock; Alexandra C Maul; Julian Lommen; Henrik Holtmann; Daniel Rothamel Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-01-12 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Daniel Fernando Hergemöller; André Antonio Pelegrine; Paulo José Pasquali; Luis Guilherme Scavone de Macedo; Marcelo Lucchesi Teixeira; Peter Karyen Moy; Antonio Carlos Aloise Journal: Contemp Clin Dent Date: 2022-09-24
Authors: André Antonio Pelegrine; Marcelo Lucchesi Teixeira; Marcelo Sperandio; Thiago Sousa Almada; Karl Erik Kahnberg; Paulo José Pasquali; Antonio Carlos Aloise Journal: Contemp Clin Dent Date: 2016 Jan-Mar
Authors: Victor Okada Vendramini; Sevda Pouraghaei; Rafael Maza Barbosa; Antônio Carlos Aloise; José Ricardo Ferreira Muniz; Marcelo Sperandio; Peter Karyen Moy; André Antonio Pelegrine; Alireza Moshaverinia Journal: Stem Cells Int Date: 2021-06-21 Impact factor: 5.443