Search

This study was designed to assess the effect of enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain, Straumann) and alloplastic bone substitute (BoneCeramic, Straumann) on new bone formation in postextraction alveolar sockets. Twenty-one patients requiring anterior single-tooth extractions and subsequent implant placement were recruited and randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups. Postextraction sockets were filled with either an alloplastic bone substitute (BoneCeramic [BC]), BC combined with Emdogain (EMD+BC), or left to heal spontaneously (SO). Histologic and histomorphometric analyses of the results were performed at 6 months postextraction. A significant increase in the percentage of new bone tissue area was found in EMD+BC compared to SO and BC groups. These findings demonstrate that compared with BC or SO, EMD+BC allowed for better formation of new bone in postextraction sockets after 6 months of healing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bone is a hierarchical material that has inspired the design of biopolymer‐derived biocomposites for tissue engineering purposes. The present study sought to synthesize and perform the physicochemical characterization and biocompatibility of a collagen‐silica‐based biocomposite for potential application in bone tissue engineering. Ultrastructure, biodegradability, swelling behavior, and biocompatibility properties were analyzed to gain insight into the advantages and limitations to the use of this biomaterial as a bone substitute. Scanning electron microscopy analysis showed a packed‐collagen fibril matrix and silica particles in the biocomposite three‐dimensional structure. As shown by analysis of in vitro swelling behavior and biodegradability, it would seem that the material swelled soon after implantation and then suffered degradation. Biocompatibility properties were analyzed in vivo 14‐days postimplantation using an experimental model in Wistar rats. The biocomposite was placed inside the hematopoietic bone marrow compartment of both tibiae (n = 16). Newly formed woven bone was observed in response to both materials. Unlike the pure‐collagen‐tissue interface, extensive areas of osseointegration were observed at the biocomposite‐tissue interface, which would indicate that silica particles stimulated new bone formation. Agglomerates of finely particulate material with no inflammatory infiltrate or multinucleated giant cells were observed in the bone marrow implanted with the biocomposite. The biocomposite showed good biocompatibility properties. Further studies are necessary to evaluate their biological behavior over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]