Literature DB >> 27183067

Comparison of Guided Bone Regeneration Between Surface-Modified and Pristine Titanium Membranes in a Rat Calvarial Model.

Thuy-Duong Nguyen, So-Hee Moon, Tae-Ju Oh, Jung-Jin Seok, Min-Ho Lee, Tae-Sung Bae.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to evaluate bioactivity of a titanium membrane with anodization, cyclic precalcification, and heat (APH) treatment (APHTM), and to compare APHTM and nontreated titanium membrane (NTTM) in guided bone regeneration using histologic analysis and microcomputed tomography (micro-CT).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: APHTM samples were prepared and immersed in simulated body fluid for 2 days, then observed using field-emission scanning electron microscopy, followed by an analysis of calcium and phosphate precipitation using an energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy. For the in vivo experiment, critical-size defects were created in rat calvaria (diameter, 8 mm) and treated with either APHTM or NTTM (n = 14 each). Biopsies were performed at 2 and 4 weeks for histologic analysis (n = 3 per group each time). Fluorochrome bone markers were injected in three rats in each group at 3 (alizarin red) and 5 weeks (calcein green), followed by histologic examination at 7 weeks. Micro-CT was performed at 8 weeks (n = 5 per group).
RESULTS: APHTM exhibited high bioactivity, characterized by dense nano-sized flakelike crystals throughout the membrane and an increase in the calcium-phosphate concentrations after 2-day immersion in simulated body fluid. At 2 and 4 weeks, APHTM samples showed an intimate bone formation onto the membrane, whereas NTTM samples demonstrated interposition of connective tissue between the membrane and newly formed bone. The same pattern was found in the fluorescent study. The micro-CT analysis revealed significantly lower bone volume but higher bone mineral density in the APHTM samples than in the NTTM samples (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: The results suggest that APH treatment on titanium membrane promotes intimate bone formation toward the membrane, thus increasing structural durability for bone regeneration. Further research is warranted to confirm the results found in these in vitro and in vivo experiments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27183067     DOI: 10.11607/jomi.4317

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  4 in total

Review 1.  Customized Barrier Membrane (Titanium Alloy, Poly Ether-Ether Ketone and Unsintered Hydroxyapatite/Poly-l-Lactide) for Guided Bone Regeneration.

Authors:  Yilin Shi; Jin Liu; Mi Du; Shengben Zhang; Yue Liu; Hu Yang; Ruiwen Shi; Yuanyuan Guo; Feng Song; Yajun Zhao; Jing Lan
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-06-28

2.  Effects of Titanium Mesh Surfaces-Coated with Hydroxyapatite/β-Tricalcium Phosphate Nanotubes on Acetabular Bone Defects in Rabbits.

Authors:  Thuy-Duong Thi Nguyen; Tae-Sung Bae; Dae-Hyeok Yang; Myung-Sik Park; Sun-Jung Yoon
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 3.  Titanium mesh for bone augmentation in oral implantology: current application and progress.

Authors:  Yu Xie; Songhang Li; Tianxu Zhang; Chao Wang; Xiaoxiao Cai
Journal:  Int J Oral Sci       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 6.344

4.  Custom Bone Regeneration (CBR): An Alternative Method of Bone Augmentation-A Case Series Study.

Authors:  Daniele De Santis; Luciano Umberto; Donadello Dario; Faccioni Paolo; Morris Zarantonello; Cristian Alberti; Giuseppe Verlato; Federico Gelpi
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-08-13       Impact factor: 4.964

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.