Display options
Share it on

Rev Bras Ortop. 2015 Dec 08;47(4):505-12. doi: 10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30137-3. eCollection 2012.

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON USE OF PLATELET-RICH PLASMA ALONE AND IN COMBINATION WITH ALPHA-TRICALCIUM PHOSPHATE CEMENT FOR BONE REPAIR IN RATS.

Revista brasileira de ortopedia

Alessandra Deise Sebben, Gabriela Hoff, Caroline Peres Klein, Thiago Alexi de Freitas, Camilla Assad, Luís Alberto Dos Santos, Jefferson Braga Silva

Affiliations

  1. MSc in Health Sciences. Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
  2. PhD in Nuclear Biosciences and Medical Physics. Professor at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
  3. BSc in Biomedicine, Feevale University, Novo Hamburgo, RS, Brazil.
  4. MD. Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
  5. Professor, Coordinator of the Biomaterials Laboratory and Head of the Department of Materials Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
  6. Full Professor, Unifesp; Professor in the Department of Surgery, FAMED, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS); Heads of the Hand and Reconstructive Microsurgery Clinic, Hospital São Lucas, PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

PMID: 27047859 PMCID: PMC4799469 DOI: 10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30137-3

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of alpha-tricalcium phosphate (α-TCP) cement combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on osteogenesis, and to compare the results with use of PRP alone.

METHODS: A bilateral defect was produced in rat femurs and was filled with one of two types of treatments (PRP or α-TCP + PRP). The outcomes were evaluated after four and eight weeks. Radiographic images provided values for the lesion area, and histology (picrosirius staining) indicated the area of new bone formation.

RESULTS: The means relating to the lesion area of the α-TCP + PRP group (2.64 ± 2.07 and 1.91 ± 0.93 mm(2), after four and eight weeks, respectively) showed numerically better but non-significant results (p > 0.05) than those seen in the PRP group (5.59 mm 2 ± 2.69 and 3.23 ± 1.46 mm 2, after four and eight weeks, respectively). The mean new bone formation rates were 62.7% ± 12.1 and 79.01% ± 6.25 in the PRP group, and 73.3% ± 12.7 and 85.86% ± 10.45 in α-TCP + PRP group, after four and eight weeks, respectively (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION: The data from this study suggest that treatment with α-TCP cement combined with PRP does not show any significant difference in comparison with PRP alone. However, there is a possible early effect on bone regeneration when the two biomaterials are applied together.

Keywords: Animals; Bone Substitutes; Growth Factor

References

  1. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999 Jul-Aug;14(4):529-35 - PubMed
  2. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 1999 Sep;29(5):1029-44, v - PubMed
  3. J South Orthop Assoc. 2000 Summer;9(2):91-7 - PubMed
  4. Implant Dent. 2001;10(4):225-8 - PubMed
  5. Biomaterials. 2002 May;23(9):2035-42 - PubMed
  6. J Periodontol. 2003 Jun;74(6):849-57 - PubMed
  7. J Rheumatol Suppl. 2003 Aug;67:4-5 - PubMed
  8. Thromb Haemost. 2004 Jan;91(1):4-15 - PubMed
  9. Biomaterials. 2004 Jul;25(15):2941-8 - PubMed
  10. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004 Apr;62(4):489-96 - PubMed
  11. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005 Feb;16(1):119-27 - PubMed
  12. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Sep;32(9):966-72 - PubMed
  13. Injury. 2005 Nov;36 Suppl 3:S20-7 - PubMed
  14. Bone. 2006 Apr;38(4):540-6 - PubMed
  15. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2006 Nov;79(2):284-91 - PubMed
  16. Biomaterials. 2007 Jan;28(3):459-67 - PubMed
  17. Biomaterials. 2007 Oct;28(29):4240-50 - PubMed
  18. Injury. 2007 Sep;38 Suppl 4:S1-2 - PubMed
  19. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Feb;90 Suppl 1:1-2 - PubMed
  20. J Periodontal Res. 2008 Apr;43(2):217-23 - PubMed
  21. Injury. 2008 Apr;39(4):384-94 - PubMed
  22. Eur Spine J. 2008 Jun;17(6):845-52 - PubMed
  23. J Periodontol. 2008 May;79(5):811-8 - PubMed
  24. Biomaterials. 2008 Oct;29(29):3983-92 - PubMed
  25. Chem Rev. 2008 Nov;108(11):4742-53 - PubMed
  26. J Craniofac Surg. 2009 Jan;20(1):34-40 - PubMed
  27. J Clin Periodontol. 2009 Sep;36(9):775-83 - PubMed
  28. J Periodontol. 2009 Oct;80(10):1599-605 - PubMed
  29. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Nov;67(11):2369-73 - PubMed
  30. Biomaterials. 2010 Apr;31(12):3201-11 - PubMed
  31. Acta Cir Bras. 2011 Feb;26(1):2-6 - PubMed
  32. Acta Orthop Belg. 2011 Feb;77(1):110-5 - PubMed
  33. Rev Bras Ortop. 2015 Dec 08;44(4):330-5 - PubMed
  34. APMIS. 1988 May;96(5):379-94 - PubMed
  35. Clin Phys Physiol Meas. 1984 Aug;5(3):145-70 - PubMed
  36. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Mar;(324):55-65 - PubMed
  37. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Aug;(329):300-9 - PubMed
  38. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998 Jun;85(6):638-46 - PubMed
  39. Biomaterials. 1998 Aug;19(16):1419-23 - PubMed
  40. Tissue Eng. 1998 Fall;4(3):231-8 - PubMed

Publication Types