Search

The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate grafting in the osteotomy gap during bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO), using a xenograft and fibrin glue. Hard tissue defects in the inferior mandibular border were assessed using cone beam computed tomography scans taken 1 week and 1 year postoperatively. The study group of 20 patients underwent bone grafting during BSSO (mean age 26.1 years; mean horizontal displacement 8.5 mm) and the control group of 20 patients did not (mean age 30.2 years; mean horizontal displacement 7.6 mm). The mean height of the mandibular defects was significantly lower in the study group, but there was no significant difference in volume measurements between the groups. Grafting had a negligible effect on large displacements (9.0-15.0 mm), which might have been due to an inadequate amount and/or positioning of the graft, or to poor dimensional stability. This may be resolved by improved graft positioning or by using a different kind of (xeno)graft.

This study assessed the mechanical characteristics, biocompatibility and osteoconductive properties of an equine hydroxyapatite collagen (eHAC) bone block when applied as a bone substitute for lateral augmentation of rat mandible. 96 rats underwent lateral augmentation of the mandible, using two substitute bone blocks (eHAC or Bio-Oss (R) spongiosa) or autologous bone grafts. Signs of inflammation, amount of bone formation and ingrowth of bone into the bone blocks were assessed at 1 and 3 months. eHAC blocks were mechanically rigid and could be fixed firmly and easily. Bio-Oss (R) spongiosa blocks were brittle and fixation was difficult. eHAC and Bio-Oss (R) spongiosa blocks were biocompatible and induced few or no signs of inflammation. Inflammation prevalence between the groups was not statistically different. Bone formation and bone growth into the blocks was significantly higher in MAC than Bio-Oss (R) spongiosa blocks, but lower than in autologous bone grafts (after 1 and 3 months). Regression analysis showed that the autologous bone graft predicted new bone formation at both time points. The eHAC block was only a predictor at I month; a trend was found at 3 months. The application of biodegradable membranes was not related to more bone ingrowth.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality of bone at grafted implant sites in the anterior maxilla. Grafting of these sites was necessary because of insufficient bone volume in a buccopalatinal direction (width at the top of the crest 1 - 3 mm).Reconstruction was performed with chin bone (N = 5), chin bone and a resorbable Bio-Gide (R) GBR membrane (N = 5) or Bio-Oss (R) spongiosa granules in combination with a Bio-Gide (R) GBR membrane (N = 5). Biopsies were taken prior to implantation, i e. 3 months after grafting with chin bone, and 6 months after grafting with Bio-Oss (R). Evaluation was done by assessing the histological and histomorphometric characteristics of full-length biopsies taken from the actual implant site.Both areas with non-vital bone and areas with apposition of bone and remodelling phenomena were observed in the chin bone group at the time of placement of the implants. Similar results were observed at implant sites reconstructed with a chin bone graft covered by a membrane. In the chin bone group without and with a GBR membrane, the mean total bone volume (TBV) was 55.2 +/- 6.8% and 57.7 +/- 11.5%, respectively; the marrow connective tissue volume (MCTV) was 44.8 +/- 6.8% and 42.3 +/- 11.5%, respectively. Remnants of the resorbable GBR membrane were not detected. In the Bio-Oss (R) group, at implant placement some newly formed bone was observed in the connective tissue suffounding the Bio-Oss (R) particles (mean TBV (newly formed bone) 17.6 +/- 14.5%), but most particles were surrounded by connective tissue. No convincing signs of remodelling were observed (mean remaining Bio-Oss (R) volume 40.5 +/- 9.3%; mean MCTV 41.9 +/- 13.1%). No implants were lost during follow up (12 months).At the time of placement of the implants the grafting material (either chin bone or Bio-Oss (R)) is still not fully replaced by new vital bone. In case of Bio-Oss (R), most of the grafting material is even still present. Despite these differences, the 1-year clinical results were very good and comparable between the various grafting techniques applied.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality of bone at grafted implant sites in the anterior maxilla. Grafting of these sites was necessary because of insufficient bone volume in a buccopalatinal direction (width at the top of the crest 1 - 3 mm). Reconstruction was performed with chin bone (N = 5), chin bone and a resorbable Bio-Gide (R) GBR membrane (N = 5) or Bio-Oss (R) spongiosa granules in combination with a Bio-Gide (R) GBR membrane (N = 5). Biopsies were taken prior to implantation, i e. 3 months after grafting with chin bone, and 6 months after grafting with Bio-Oss (R). Evaluation was done by assessing the histological and histomorphometric characteristics of full-length biopsies taken from the actual implant site. Both areas with non-vital bone and areas with apposition of bone and remodelling phenomena were observed in the chin bone group at the time of placement of the implants. Similar results were observed at implant sites reconstructed with a chin bone graft covered by a membrane. In the chin bone group without and with a GBR membrane, the mean total bone volume (TBV) was 55.2 +/- 6.8% and 57.7 +/- 11.5%, respectively; the marrow connective tissue volume (MCTV) was 44.8 +/- 6.8% and 42.3 +/- 11.5%, respectively. Remnants of the resorbable GBR membrane were not detected. In the Bio-Oss (R) group, at implant placement some newly formed bone was observed in the connective tissue suffounding the Bio-Oss (R) particles (mean TBV (newly formed bone) 17.6 +/- 14.5%), but most particles were surrounded by connective tissue. No convincing signs of remodelling were observed (mean remaining Bio-Oss (R) volume 40.5 +/- 9.3%; mean MCTV 41.9 +/- 13.1%). No implants were lost during follow up (12 months). At the time of placement of the implants the grafting material (either chin bone or Bio-Oss (R)) is still not fully replaced by new vital bone. In case of Bio-Oss (R), most of the grafting material is even still present. Despite these differences, the 1-year clinical results were very good and comparable between the various grafting techniques applied.

Objectives This study aims to study how Bio-Oss® can induce osteoblast differentiation in mesenchymal stem cells, the expression levels of bone related genes and mesenchymal stem cells markers using real time Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction. Methods PB-hMSCs stem preparations were obtained for gradient centrifugation from peripheral blood of healthy anonymous volunteers, using the Acuspin System-Histopaque 1077. The samples were then cultured for 7 days for RNA processing, and the expression was quantified using real time PCR. Results Bio-Oss® caused an induction of osteoblast transcriptional factor like RUNX2 and of bone related genes; SPP1 and FOSL1. In contrast, the expression of ENG was significantly decreased in stem cells treated with Bio-Oss® with respect to untreated cells, indicating the differentiation effect of this biomaterial on stem cells. Conclusion The results obtained can be relevant to enhance the understanding of the molecular mechanism of bone regeneration and can act as a model for comparing other materials with similar clinical effects.

Adequate bone volume is imperative for the osseointegration of endosseous implants, but postextraction resorption and remodeling may challenge implant placement. The use of bone biomaterials has been advocated to fill extraction sites and to enhance primary implant stability during osseointegration. The objective of the case series was to evaluate bone formation histologically and biomechanically in extraction sites following implantation of three commercially available bone biomaterials to compare their ability to allow guided bone regeneration.Thirty-six periodontally involved teeth were extracted from eight healthy non-smoking subjects. At least two bone biomaterials, a synthetic sponge based on polylactic-polyglycolic acid technology (FIS), bovine porous bone mineral (BPBM), or a natural coral derivative physically and chemically transformed into a calcium carbonate ceramic (COR), and one non-grafted control were applied to the extraction sockets within each subject and were covered by an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene device. The devices were removed after 2 months, and trephine biopsies were obtained from each site 4 months later. At that time, endosseous implants were placed in 25 of the sites, and healing abutments were placed; measurements were taken 4 to 6 months later with an electronic mobility testing device.The percentage of residual biomaterial was 5.6% +/- 8.9% for FIS (P0.001), 20.2% +/- 17.0% for BPBM (P0.05), and 12.0% +/- 16.4% for COR (P0.001). The amount of residual biomaterial after 6 months showed a significant relationship with the insertion torque measurements during the first third of implant insertion (P0.05) and with values of the electronic mobility testing device at the abutment connection (P = 0.05). Histologically, new bone apposition was seen on BPBM particles. FIS sites showed similar ingrowth of blood vessels and osteocytes as empty controls.All sites revealed good primary stability at implant insertion and proper implant rigidity at abutment placement, indicating that early implant osseointegration was not influenced by the application of bone biomaterials used in this study.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality of bone at grafted implant sites in the anterior maxilla. Grafting of these sites was necessary because of insufficient bone volume in a buccopalatinal direction (width at the top of the crest 1 - 3 mm). Reconstruction was performed with chin bone (N = 5), chin bone and a resorbable Bio-Gide (R) GBR membrane (N = 5) or Bio-Oss (R) spongiosa granules in combination with a Bio-Gide (R) GBR membrane (N = 5). Biopsies were taken prior to implantation, i e. 3 months after grafting with chin bone, and 6 months after grafting with Bio-Oss (R). Evaluation was done by assessing the histological and histomorphometric characteristics of full-length biopsies taken from the actual implant site. Both areas with non-vital bone and areas with apposition of bone and remodelling phenomena were observed in the chin bone group at the time of placement of the implants. Similar results were observed at implant sites reconstructed with a chin bone graft covered by a membrane. In the chin bone group without and with a GBR membrane, the mean total bone volume (TBV) was 55.2 +/- 6.8% and 57.7 +/- 11.5%, respectively; the marrow connective tissue volume (MCTV) was 44.8 +/- 6.8% and 42.3 +/- 11.5%, respectively. Remnants of the resorbable GBR membrane were not detected. In the Bio-Oss (R) group, at implant placement some newly formed bone was observed in the connective tissue suffounding the Bio-Oss (R) particles (mean TBV (newly formed bone) 17.6 +/- 14.5%), but most particles were surrounded by connective tissue. No convincing signs of remodelling were observed (mean remaining Bio-Oss (R) volume 40.5 +/- 9.3%; mean MCTV 41.9 +/- 13.1%). No implants were lost during follow up (12 months). At the time of placement of the implants the grafting material (either chin bone or Bio-Oss (R)) is still not fully replaced by new vital bone. In case of Bio-Oss (R), most of the grafting material is even still present. Despite these differences, the 1-year clinical results were very good and comparable between the various grafting techniques applied.