[Biomaterials for bone filling: comparisons between autograft, hydroxyapatite and one highly purified bovine xenograft].

Bone grafts are becoming increasingly common in orthopaedics, neurosurgery and periodontology. Twenty one New Zealand rabbits were used in the present study comparing several materials usable as bone substitutes. A 4.5 mm hole was drilled in the inner femoral condyles. Holes were filled with either an autograft (from the opposite condyle), an hydroxylapatite (Bioapatite), or a highly purified bovine xenograft (T650 Lubboc). Animals were sacrificed at 1, 3 and 6 months post implantation and a quantitative analysis of newly-formed bone volume (BNF/IV) and remaining biomaterials (BMAT/IV) was done. In addition, some holes were left unfilled and served as controls. At 6 months, there was no tendency for spontaneous repair in the control animals. The autografted animals have repaired their trabecular mass and architecture within the first month. Hydroxylapatite appeared unresorbed at six months and only thin and scanty new trabeculae were observed. The xenograft induced woven bone trabeculae formation on the first month. This was associated with resorption of the material by two multinucleated cell populations. At six months, the epiphyseal architecture was restored and the biomaterial has disappeared in most cases. Xenografts appear a promising alternative to autografts and allografts, whose infectious risks and ethical problems should always be borne in mind.