| Literature DB >> 28773126 |
Shintaro Sukegawa1, Takahiro Kanno2,3, Yoshiki Manabe4, Kenichi Matsumoto5, Yuka Sukegawa-Takahashi6, Masanori Masui7, Yoshihiko Furuki8.
Abstract
OSTEOTRANS MX® (Takiron Co., Ltd., Osaka, Japan) is a bioactive resorbable maxillofacial osteosynthetic material composed of an unsintered hydroxyapatite/poly-l-lactide composite, and its effective osteoconductive capacity has been previously documented. However, the mechanical strength of this plate system is unclear. Thus, the aim of this in vitro study was to assess its tensile and shear strength and evaluate the biomechanical intensity of different osteosynthesis plate designs after sagittal split ramus osteotomy by simulating masticatory forces in a clinical setting. For tensile and shear strength analyses, three mechanical strength measurement samples were prepared by fixing unsintered hydroxyapatite/poly-l-lactide composed plates to polycarbonate skeletal models. Regarding biomechanical loading evaluation, 12 mandibular replicas were used and divided into four groups for sagittal split ramus osteotomy fixation. Each sample was secured in a jig and subjected to vertical load on the first molar teeth. Regarding shear strength, the novel-shaped unsintered hydroxyapatite/poly-l-lactide plate had significantly high intensity. Upon biomechanical loading evaluation, this plate system also displayed significantly high stability in addition to bioactivity, with no observed plate fracture. Thus, we have clearly demonstrated the efficacy of this plate system using an in vitro model of bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy of the mandible.Entities:
Keywords: ">l-lactide composite plate; bioactive resorbable plate; biomechanical loading evaluation; sagittal split ramus osteotomy; tensile and shear strength evaluation; unsintered hydroxyapatite/poly-
Year: 2017 PMID: 28773126 PMCID: PMC5551807 DOI: 10.3390/ma10070764
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Mechanical strength models were prepared by fixing the plate with screws to the polycarbonate plate. (A). Tensile strength; (B). Shear strength.
Figure 2(A) Sagittal split ramus osteotomy mimicking the Dal Pont modification, guided by a computer-controlled program, was performed in the mandible. The buccal cortex osteotomy of the mandible model was carried out towards the angle of the mandible from the second molars. An additional bone model was prepared from bone defects so as not to be affected by bone interference; (B) (a) Single conventional titanium plate; (b) Single u-HA/PLLA straight plate; (c) Double u-HA/PLLA straight plates; (d) u-HA/PLLA ladder plate.
Figure 3A linear load in the mandibular first molar region was applied at a displacement speed of 10 mm/min. We compared the amount of movement at the time of the load in the postoperative average occlusal force (postoperative 1 week, about 50 N, and postoperative 1 month, about 130 N) to the reference.
Mean values and respective standard deviations for the tensile strength test for each group.
| Tensile Strength Evaluation | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | 152.3 | 300.4 | 335.5 |
| #2 | 161.5 | 302.8 | 342.2 |
| #3 | 149.9 | 294.5 | 341.4 |
| Ave. | 154.6 | 299.2 | 339.7 |
| S.D. | 6.1 | 4.3 | 3.7 |
| #1 | 198.3 | 394.7 | 459.1 |
| #2 | 190.8 | 443.7 | 446.4 |
| #3 | 202.6 | 428.5 | 464.4 |
| Ave. | 197.2 | 422.3 | 456.6 |
| S.D. | 6.0 | 25.1 | 9.3 |
Mean values and respective standard deviations for the shear strength test for each group.
| Shear Strength Evaluation | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | 22.4 | 46.9 | 110.2 |
| #2 | 20.6 | 50.1 | 115.1 |
| #3 | 21.1 | 48.6 | 111.8 |
| Ave. | 21.4 | 48.5 | 112.4 |
| S.D. | 1.0 | 1.6 | 2.5 |
| #1 | 63.8 | 126.8 | 187.2 |
| #2 | 63.3 | 123.3 | 174.7 |
| #3 | 63.0 | 91.5 | 171.3 |
| Ave. | 63.4 | 113.9 | 177.7 |
| S.D. | 0.4 | 19.4 | 8.4 |
Figure 4Mean values and respective standard deviations for the tensile strength test for each group. Left graph shows the maximum stress, and the right graph shows the stress during 1-mm movement in tensile strength.
Figure 5Mean values and respective standard deviations for the shear strength test for each group. Left graph shows the maximum stress, and the right graph shows the stress during 1-mm movement in shear strength.
Mean values and respective standard deviations for the amount of movement by adding load for each group.
| #1 | 2.58 | 4.02 | 1.34 | 0.80 |
| #2 | 2.05 | 3.64 | 1.16 | 1.32 |
| #3 | 1.68 | 3.33 | 1.38 | 1.14 |
| Ave. | 2.10 | 3.66 | 1.29 | 1.09 |
| S.D. | 0.45 | 0.35 | 0.12 | 0.26 |
| #1 | 7.39 | - | - | 3.33 |
| #2 | 6.67 | - | 6.21 | 3.57 |
| #3 | 7.87 | - | 5.61 | 3.49 |
| Ave. | 7.31 | - | - | 3.46 |
| S.D. | 0.60 | - | - | 0.12 |
Figure 6Mean values and respective standard deviations for the amount of movement by adding load for each group. Left graph shows the amount of movement with 50 N load, and the right graph shows the amount of movement with 130 N load.