Literature DB >> 30392111

Analysis of bone formation and membrane resorption in guided bone regeneration using deproteinized bovine bone mineral versus calcium sulfate.

Alessandro Gavazzoni1, Liogi Iwaki Filho1, Luzmarina Hernandes2.   

Abstract

Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) is a technique based on the use of a physical barrier that isolates the region of bone regeneration from adjacent tissues. The objective of this study was to compare GBR, adopting a critical-size defect model in rat calvaria and using collagen membrane separately combined with two filling materials, each having different resorption rates. A circular defect 8 mm in diameter was made in the calvaria of Wistar rats. The defects were then filled with calcium sulfate (CaS group) or deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM group) and covered by resorbable collagen membrane. The animals were killed 15, 30, 45 and 60 days after the surgical procedure. Samples were collected, fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and processed for paraffin embedding. The resultant sections were stained with H&E for histological and histomorphometric study. For the histomorphometric study, the area of membrane was quantified along with the amount of bone formed in the region of the membrane. Calcium sulfate was reabsorbed more rapidly compared to DBBM. The CaS group had the highest percentages of remaining membrane at 15, 30, 45 and 60 days, compared to the DBBM group. The DBBM group had the highest amount of new bone at 45 and 60 days compared to the CaS group. Based on these results, it was concluded that the type of filling material may influence both the resorption of collagen membrane and amount of bone formed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30392111     DOI: 10.1007/s10856-018-6167-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med        ISSN: 0957-4530            Impact factor:   3.896


  46 in total

Review 1.  Collagen membranes: a review.

Authors:  P Bunyaratavej; H L Wang
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 6.993

2.  Effect of two bioabsorbable barrier membranes on bone regeneration of standardized defects in calvarial bone: a comparative histomorphometric study in pigs.

Authors:  Michael M Bornstein; Guy Heynen; Dieter D Bosshardt; Daniel Buser
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 6.993

3.  Comparative maxillary bone-defect healing by calcium-sulphate or deproteinized bovine bone particles and extra cellular matrix membranes in a guided bone regeneration setting: an experimental study in rabbits.

Authors:  Alberto Turri; Christer Dahlin
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 5.977

4.  Healing of mandibular defects with different biodegradable and non-biodegradable membranes: an experimental study in rats.

Authors:  G Zellin; A Gritli-Linde; A Linde
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 12.479

5.  Clinical classification of complications in guided bone regeneration procedures by means of a nonresorbable membrane.

Authors:  Filippo Fontana; Emilio Maschera; Isabella Rocchietta; Massimo Simion
Journal:  Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes in combination with Bio-Oss for guided bone regeneration.

Authors:  N U Zitzmann; R Naef; P Schärer
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  1997 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 7.  Clinical outcomes of GBR procedures to correct peri-implant dehiscences and fenestrations: a systematic review.

Authors:  Matteo Chiapasco; Marco Zaniboni
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 5.977

8.  Response of a calcium sulfate bone graft substitute in a confined cancellous defect.

Authors:  W R Walsh; P Morberg; Y Yu; J L Yang; W Haggard; P C Sheath; M Svehla; W J M Bruce
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Bone regeneration by the osteopromotion technique using bioabsorbable membranes: an experimental study in rats.

Authors:  E Sandberg; C Dahlin; A Linde
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 1.895

10.  Comparative study of 5 different membranes for guided bone regeneration of rabbit mandibular defects beyond critical size.

Authors:  Vasilis Thomaidis; Kostas Kazakos; Dimitris N Lyras; Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos; Nikolaos Lazaridis; Dimitrios Karakasis; Sotirios Botaitis; George Agrogiannis
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2008-04
View more
  1 in total

1.  Influence of Age on Calvarial Critical Size Defect Dimensions: A Radiographic and Histological Study.

Authors:  Malik Hudieb; Adeeb Haddad; Mohammad Bakeer; Ahmad Alkhazaaleh; Mustafa AlKhader; Dafi Taani; Shohei Kasugai
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2021 Nov-Dec 01       Impact factor: 1.172

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.