Literature DB >> 33419327

Biocompatibility and Immune Response of a Newly Developed Volume-Stable Magnesium-Based Barrier Membrane in Combination with a PVD Coating for Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR).

Larissa Steigmann1, Ole Jung2, Wolfgang Kieferle3, Sanja Stojanovic4,5, Annica Proehl6, Oliver Görke7, Steffen Emmert2, Stevo Najman4,5, Mike Barbeck6,7, Daniel Rothamel8,9.   

Abstract

To date, there are no bioresorbable alternatives to non-resorbable and volume-stable membranes in the field of dentistry for guided bone or tissue regeneration (GBR/GTR). Even magnesium (Mg) has been shown to constitute a favorable biomaterial for the development of stabilizing structures. However, it has been described that it is necessary to prevent premature degradation to ensure both the functionality and the biocompatibility of such Mg implants. Different coating strategies have already been developed, but most of them did not provide the desired functionality. The present study analyses a new approach based on ion implantation (II) with PVD coating for the passivation of a newly developed Mg membrane for GBR/GTR procedures. To demonstrate comprehensive biocompatibility and successful passivation of the Mg membranes, untreated Mg (MG) and coated Mg (MG-Co) were investigated in vitro and in vivo. Thereby a collagen membrane with an already shown biocompatibility was used as control material. All investigations were performed according to EN ISO 10993 regulations. The in vitro results showed that both the untreated and PVD-coated membranes were not cytocompatible. However, both membrane types fulfilled the requirements for in vivo biocompatibility. Interestingly, the PVD coating did not have an influence on the gas cavity formation compared to the uncoated membrane, but it induced lower numbers of anti-inflammatory macrophages in comparison to the pure Mg membrane and the collagen membrane. In contrast, the pure Mg membrane provoked an immune response that was fully comparable to the collagen membrane. Altogether, this study shows that pure magnesium membranes represent a promising alternative compared to the nonresorbable volume-stable materials for GBR/GTR therapy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  barrier membrane; biocompatibility; cytocompatibility; dentistry; guided bone regeneration; macrophage; magnesium implant

Year:  2020        PMID: 33419327      PMCID: PMC7767206          DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines8120636

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biomedicines        ISSN: 2227-9059


  42 in total

1.  Clinical and Histologic Evaluations of Porcine-Derived Collagen Matrix Membrane Used for Vertical Soft Tissue Augmentation: A Case Series.

Authors:  Algirdas Puisys; Saulius Zukauskas; Ricardas Kubilius; Mike Barbeck; Dainius Razukevičius; Laura Linkevičiene; Tomas Linkevičius
Journal:  Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  Monocytes and macrophages in tissue repair: Implications for immunoregenerative biomaterial design.

Authors:  Molly E Ogle; Claire E Segar; Sraeyes Sridhar; Edward A Botchwey
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2016-05

3.  Optimized in vitro procedure for assessing the cytocompatibility of magnesium-based biomaterials.

Authors:  Ole Jung; Ralf Smeets; Dario Porchetta; Alexander Kopp; Christoph Ptock; Ute Müller; Max Heiland; Max Schwade; Björn Behr; Nadja Kröger; Lan Kluwe; Henning Hanken; Philip Hartjen
Journal:  Acta Biomater       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 8.947

4.  Behavior of mammalian cells on magnesium substituted bare and hydroxyapatite deposited (Ti,Mg)N coatings.

Authors:  Sakip Onder; Ayse Ceren Calikoglu-Koyuncu; Kursat Kazmanli; Mustafa Urgen; Gamze Torun Kose; Fatma Nese Kok
Journal:  N Biotechnol       Date:  2014-12-30       Impact factor: 5.079

5.  Magnesium alloys: predicting in vivo corrosion with in vitro immersion testing.

Authors:  Jemimah Walker; Shaylin Shadanbaz; Nicholas T Kirkland; Edward Stace; Tim Woodfield; Mark P Staiger; George J Dias
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.368

6.  Induction of multinucleated giant cells in response to small sized bovine bone substitute (Bio-Oss™) results in an enhanced early implantation bed vascularization.

Authors:  M Barbeck; S E Udeabor; J Lorenz; A Kubesch; J Choukroun; R A Sader; C J Kirkpatrick; S Ghanaati
Journal:  Ann Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2014 Jul-Dec

7.  In Vivo Analysis of the Biocompatibility and Immune Response of Jellyfish Collagen Scaffolds and its Suitability for Bone Regeneration.

Authors:  Iris Flaig; Milena Radenković; Stevo Najman; Annica Pröhl; Ole Jung; Mike Barbeck
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 5.923

8.  Mesenchymal Stem Cells as Promoters, Enhancers, and Playmakers of the Translational Regenerative Medicine 2018.

Authors:  Andrea Ballini; Stefania Cantore; Salvatore Scacco; Dario Coletti; Marco Tatullo
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 5.443

9.  In Vivo Analysis of the Biocompatibility and Macrophage Response of a Non-Resorbable PTFE Membrane for Guided Bone Regeneration.

Authors:  Tadas Korzinskas; Ole Jung; Ralf Smeets; Sanja Stojanovic; Stevo Najman; Kristina Glenske; Michael Hahn; Sabine Wenisch; Reinhard Schnettler; Mike Barbeck
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2018-09-27       Impact factor: 5.923

10.  The Addition of High Doses of Hyaluronic Acid to a Biphasic Bone Substitute Decreases the Proinflammatory Tissue Response.

Authors:  Dominik Sieger; Tadas Korzinskas; Ole Jung; Sanja Stojanovic; Sabine Wenisch; Ralf Smeets; Martin Gosau; Reinhard Schnettler; Stevo Najman; Mike Barbeck
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 5.923

View more
  8 in total

1.  In Vitro Analysis of the Cytocompatibility of a Novel Porcine Aortic Patch for Vascular Reconstruction.

Authors:  Sven Pantermehl; Said Alkildani; Elisa Meyer; Ignacio Stowe; Jens Pissarek; Pia Moosmann; Ole Jung; Mike Barbeck
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.155

2.  In Vitro and Ex Vivo Analysis of Collagen Foams for Soft and Hard Tissue Regeneration.

Authors:  Ole Jung; Mike Barbeck; L U Fan; Fabian Korte; Cuifeng Zhao; Rumen Krastev; Sven Pantermehl; Xin Xiong
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.406

Review 3.  Advances in Barrier Membranes for Guided Bone Regeneration Techniques.

Authors:  Ze Yang; Chang Wu; Huixin Shi; Xinyu Luo; Hui Sun; Qiang Wang; Dan Zhang
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-06-22

4.  The Granule Size Mediates the In Vivo Foreign Body Response and the Integration Behavior of Bone Substitutes.

Authors:  Manuel Abels; Said Alkildani; Annica Pröhl; Xin Xiong; Rumen Krastev; Tadas Korzinskas; Sanja Stojanovic; Ole Jung; Stevo Najman; Mike Barbeck
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  Biocompatibility Analyses of HF-Passivated Magnesium Screws for Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR).

Authors:  Ole Jung; Bernhard Hesse; Sanja Stojanovic; Christian Seim; Timm Weitkamp; Milijana Batinic; Oliver Goerke; Željka Perić Kačarević; Patrick Rider; Stevo Najman; Mike Barbeck
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 6.  Advances in Modification Methods Based on Biodegradable Membranes in Guided Bone/Tissue Regeneration: A Review.

Authors:  Yue Gao; Shuai Wang; Biying Shi; Yuxuan Wang; Yimeng Chen; Xuanyi Wang; Eui-Seok Lee; Heng-Bo Jiang
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 4.329

7.  Editorial of the Special Issue: "Soft and Hard Tissue Regeneration".

Authors:  Mike Barbeck; Said Alkildani; Ole Jung
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2022-02-01

Review 8.  Recent advances in biofunctional guided bone regeneration materials for repairing defective alveolar and maxillofacial bone: A review.

Authors:  Bing Wang; Chengmin Feng; Yiming Liu; Fanglin Mi; Jun Dong
Journal:  Jpn Dent Sci Rev       Date:  2022-08-27
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.