Display options
Share it on

Int J Biomater. 2020 May 23;2020:5182845. doi: 10.1155/2020/5182845. eCollection 2020.

Comparative Evaluation of Bone Repair with Four Different Bone Substitutes in Critical Size Defects.

International journal of biomaterials

Gustavo Grossi-Oliveira, Leonardo P Faverani, Bruno Coelho Mendes, Tárik Ocon Braga Polo, Gabriel Cury Batista Mendes, Valthierre Nunes de Lima, Paulo Domingos Ribeiro Júnior, Roberta Okamoto, Osvaldo Magro-Filho

Affiliations

  1. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Diagnostic and Surgery, Aracatuba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Aracatuba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
  2. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Surgery, University of Sagrado Coracao, Bauru, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
  3. Human Anatomy, Department of Basic Sciences, Aracatuba School of Dentistry, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Aracatuba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

PMID: 32528537 PMCID: PMC7262656 DOI: 10.1155/2020/5182845

Abstract

This study evaluated the osteoconductive potential of four biomaterials used to fill bone defects. For this, 24 male Albino rabbits were submitted to the creation of a bilateral 8 mm calvarial bone defect. The animals were divided into four groups-bovine hydroxyapatite, Bio-Oss® (BIO); Lumina-Bone Porous® (LBP); Bonefill® (BFL); and an alloplastic material, Clonos® (CLN)-and were euthanized at 14 and 40 days. The samples were subjected to histological and histometric analysis for newly formed bone area. Immunohistochemical analysis for Runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and osteocalcin (OC) was performed. After statistical analysis, the CLN group showed greater new bone formation (NB) in both periods analyzed (

Copyright © 2020 Gustavo Grossi-Oliveira et al.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 May;25(5):567-72 - PubMed
  2. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 May 20;29(6):620-634 - PubMed
  3. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996 Nov-Dec;11(6):760-6 - PubMed
  4. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Mar-Apr;29(2):e247-58 - PubMed
  5. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Feb;(395):4-10 - PubMed
  6. Bone. 2016 Feb;83:197-209 - PubMed
  7. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Sep-Oct;28(5):e243-51 - PubMed
  8. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2008 Apr;28(2):123-35 - PubMed
  9. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012 Sep;9(5):554-60 - PubMed
  10. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1999 Oct;19(5):481-7 - PubMed
  11. Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Jun;21(5):1485-1494 - PubMed
  12. Biomaterials. 2011 May;32(15):3855-61 - PubMed
  13. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Oct;24(10):1164-72 - PubMed
  14. Implant Dent. 2005 Dec;14(4):322-5 - PubMed
  15. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Apr;19(4):393-401 - PubMed
  16. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Feb;43(2):251-60 - PubMed
  17. J Oral Surg. 1973 Dec;31(12):905-12 - PubMed
  18. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2013 May 01;18(3):e510-5 - PubMed
  19. J Periodontol. 2008 Jul;79(7):1232-40 - PubMed
  20. Implant Dent. 2007 Mar;16(1):42-53 - PubMed
  21. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010 Jan;21(1):1-12 - PubMed
  22. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2012 Apr;16(2):247-52 - PubMed
  23. Nanomedicine (Lond). 2007 Dec;2(6):763-75 - PubMed
  24. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Jan-Feb;28(1):68-76 - PubMed
  25. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Nov;20(11):1254-64 - PubMed
  26. Biomed Mater. 2012 Apr;7(2):024112 - PubMed
  27. Arch Oral Biol. 2014 May;59(5):550-8 - PubMed
  28. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016 Jan-Feb;31(1):204-15 - PubMed
  29. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003 Dec;14(6):775-83 - PubMed
  30. Ann Anat. 2011 Oct 20;193(5):412-7 - PubMed

Publication Types