Comparative analysis of the in vivo kinetic properties of various bone substitutes filled into a peri-implant canine defect model
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: Deproteinized bovine bone or synthetic hydroxyapatite are 2 prevalent bone grafting materials used in the clinical treatment of peri-implant bone defects. However, the differences in bone formation among these materials remain unclear. This study evaluated osteogenesis kinetics in peri-implant defects using 2 types of deproteinized bovine bone (Bio-Oss® and Bio-Oss/Collagen®) and 2 types of synthetic hydroxyapatite (Apaceram-AX® and Refit®). We considered factors including newly generated bone volume; bone, osteoid, and material occupancy; and bone-to-implant contact. Methods: A beagle model with a mandibular defect was created by extracting the bilateral mandibular third and fourth premolars. Simultaneously, an implant was inserted into the defect, and the space between the implant and the surrounding bone walls was filled with BioOss, Bio-Oss/Collagen, Apaceram-AX, Refit, or autologous bone. Micro-computed tomography and histological analyses were conducted at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (Refit and autologous bone were not included at the 6-month time point due to their rapid absorption). Results: All materials demonstrated excellent biocompatibility and osteoconductivity. At 3 months, Bio-Oss and Apaceram-AX exhibited significantly greater volumes of formation than the other materials, with Bio-Oss having a marginally higher amount. However, this outcome was reversed at 6 months, with no significant difference between the 2 materials at either time point. Apaceram-AX displayed notably slower bioresorption and the largest quantity of residual material at both time points. In contrast, Refit had significantly greater bioresorption, with complete resorption and rapid maturation involving cortical bone formation at the crest at 3 months, Refit demonstrated the highest mineralized tissue and osteoid occupancy after 3 months, albeit without statistical significance. Conclusions: Overall, the materials demonstrated varying post-implantation behaviors in vivo. Thus, in a clinical setting, both the properties of these materials and the specific conditions of the defects needing reinforcement should be considered to identify the most suitable material.
Abstract
Purpose: Deproteinized bovine bone or synthetic hydroxyapatite are 2 prevalent bone grafting materials used in the clinical treatment of peri-implant bone defects. However, the differences in bone formation among these materials remain unclear. This study evaluated osteogenesis kinetics in peri-implant defects using 2 types of deproteinized bovine bone (Bio-Oss® and Bio-Oss/Collagen®) and 2 types of synthetic hydroxyapatite (Apaceram-AX® and Refit®). We considered factors including newly generated bone volume; bone, osteoid, and material occupancy; and bone-to-implant contact. Methods: A beagle model with a mandibular defect was created by extracting the bilateral mandibular third and fourth premolars. Simultaneously, an implant was inserted into the defect, and the space between the implant and the surrounding bone walls was filled with BioOss, Bio-Oss/Collagen, Apaceram-AX, Refit, or autologous bone. Micro-computed tomography and histological analyses were conducted at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (Refit and autologous bone were not included at the 6-month time point due to their rapid absorption). Results: All materials demonstrated excellent biocompatibility and osteoconductivity. At 3 months, Bio-Oss and Apaceram-AX exhibited significantly greater volumes of formation than the other materials, with Bio-Oss having a marginally higher amount. However, this outcome was reversed at 6 months, with no significant difference between the 2 materials at either time point. Apaceram-AX displayed notably slower bioresorption and the largest quantity of residual material at both time points. In contrast, Refit had significantly greater bioresorption, with complete resorption and rapid maturation involving cortical bone formation at the crest at 3 months, Refit demonstrated the highest mineralized tissue and osteoid occupancy after 3 months, albeit without statistical significance. Conclusions: Overall, the materials demonstrated varying post-implantation behaviors in vivo. Thus, in a clinical setting, both the properties of these materials and the specific conditions of the defects needing reinforcement should be considered to identify the most suitable material.
참고문헌 (37)
- Guillaume B, "Dental implants : a review", Morphologie, 100, pp.189~198 (2016)
- Bodic F, "Bone loss and teeth", Joint Bone Spine, 72, pp.215~221 (2005)
- Zhao R, "Bone grafts and substitutes in dentistry : a review of current trends and developments", Molecules, 26, pp.3007~ (2021)
- Chavda S, "Human studies of vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation comparing different types of bone graft materials : a systematic review", J Oral Implantol, 44, pp.74~84 (2018)
- Axelsson P, "The long-term effect of a plaque control program on tooth mortality, caries and periodontal disease in adults. Results after 30 years of maintenance", J Clin Periodontol, 31, pp.749~757 (2004)
- Bhalla N, "Update on maxillary sinus augmentation", Dent Clin North Am, 65, pp.197~210 (2021)
- Osorio CC, "Evaluation of density, volume, height and rate of bone resorption of substitutes of autologous bone grafts for the repair of alveolar clefts in humans : a systematic review", Heliyon, 6, pp.e04646~ (2020)
- Kumar P, "Bone grafts in dentistry", J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 5, pp.S125~S127 (2013)
- Bauer TW, "Bone graft materials. An overview of the basic science", Clin Orthop Relat Res, 371, pp.10~27 (2000)
- Fillingham Y, "Bone grafts and their substitutes", Bone Joint J, 98-B, pp.6~9 (2016)
- Giannoudis PV, "Bone substitutes : an update", Injury, 36(Suppl 3), pp.S20~S27 (2005)
- Yamada M, "Current bone substitutes for implant dentistry", J Prosthodont Res, 62, pp.152~161 (2018)
- Pérez-Sánchez MJ, "Biomaterials for bone regeneration", Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal, 15, pp.e517~e522 (2010)
- García-Gareta E, "Osteoinduction of bone grafting materials for bone repair and regeneration", Bone, 81, pp.112~121 (2015)
- Finkemeier CG, "Bone-grafting and bone-graft substitutes", J Bone Joint Surg Am, 84, pp.454~464 (2002)
- Yamasaki N, "A comparative assessment of synthetic ceramic bone substitutes with different composition and microstructure in rabbit femoral condyle model", J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 91, pp.788~798 (2009)
- Kikuchi M, "Self-organization mechanism in a bone-like hydroxyapatite", collagen nanocomposite synthesized in vitro and its biological reaction in vivo, 2001, pp.22, 1705~1711
- Riihonen R, "Degradation of hydroxyapatite in vivo and in vitro requires osteoclastic sodium-bicarbonate co-transporter NBCn1", Matrix Biol, 29, pp.287~294 (2010)
- Wenisch S, "In vivo mechanisms of hydroxyapatite ceramic degradation by osteoclasts : fine structural microscopy", J Biomed Mater Res A, 67, pp.713~718 (2003)
- Rolvien T, "Cellular mechanisms responsible for success and failure of bone substitute materials", Int J Mol Sci, 19, pp.2893~ (2018)
- Baldini N, "Deproteinized bovine bone in periodontal and implant surgery", Dent Mater, 27, pp.61~70 (2011)
- Das D, "Bioresorption and degradation of biomaterials", Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol, 126, pp.317~333 (2012)
- Fukuba S, "Alloplastic bone substitutes for periodontal and bone regeneration in dentistry : current status and prospects", Materials(Basel), 14, pp.1096~ (2021)
- Chang HH, "Neutralized dicalcium phosphate and hydroxyapatite biphasic bioceramics promote bone regeneration in critical peri-implant bone defects", Materials(Basel), 13, pp.823~ (2020)
- De Santis E, "Healing outcomes at implants installed in sites augmented with particulate autologous bone and xenografts. An experimental study in dogs", Clin Oral Implants Res, 24, pp.77~86 (2013)
- Dahlin C, "Healing of bone defects by guided tissue regeneration", Plast Reconstr Surg, 81, pp.672~676 (1988)
- Fickl S, "Hard tissue alterations after socket preservation : an experimental study in the beagle dog", Clin Oral Implants Res, 19, pp.1111~1118 (2008)
- Mano T, "Histological comparison of three apatitic bone substitutes with different carbonate contents in alveolar bone defects in a beagle mandible with simultaneous implant installation", J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 108, pp.1450~1459 (2020)
- Abdelgawad ME, "Does collagen trigger the recruitment of osteoblasts into vacated bone resorption lacunae during bone remodeling?", Bone, 67, pp.181~188 (2014)
- Folkman M, "Comparison of bone-to-implant contact and bone volume around implants placed with or without site preparation : a histomorphometric study in rabbits", Sci Rep, 10, pp.12446~ (2020)
- Manresa C, "The comparison between implant stability quotient and bone-implant contact revisited : an experiment in Beagle dog", Clin Oral Implants Res, 25, pp.1213~1221 (2014)
- Meagher MJ, "Optimizing a micro-computed tomography-based surrogate measurement of bone-implant contact", J Orthop Res, 36, pp.979~986 (2018)
- Molly L, "Bone density and primary stability in implant therapy", Clin Oral Implants Res, 17(Suppl 2), pp.124~135 (2006)
- Bernhardt R, "Comparison of bone-implant contact and bone-implant volume between 2D-histological sections and 3D-SRμCT slices", Eur Cell Mater, 23, pp.237~247 (2012)
- Park YS, "Correlation between microtomography and histomorphometry for assessment of implant osseointegration", Clin Oral Implants Res, 16, pp.156~160 (2005)
- Block MS, "Loaded hydroxylapatite-coated and grit-blasted titanium implants in dogs", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 4, pp.219~225 (1989)
- Lian Z, "Effect of bone to implant contact percentage on bone remodelling surrounding a dental implant", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 39, pp.690~698 (2010)