Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010 Dec;48(8):607-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2009.09.012. Epub 2009 Nov 3.

Comparison of different harvesting methods from the flat and long bones of rats.

Author information

1
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Centre for Dentistry, Oral and Orthodontic Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. constuehmer@web.de

Abstract

Different harvesting methods have been developed for bony augmentation before implantation. The aim of the present study was to assess the viability of endochondral (femoral) and membranous (mandibular) bone cells harvested by different methods under standard conditions in an animal model, and to investigate the surface of the bone in the harvested area. Samples of mandibular and femoral bone were harvested using a drilling burr, a piezoelectrical device, or a Safescraper(®). Blocks of bone that had been harvested with cutting forceps were used as controls. The size of the samples was measured and they were examined by conventional microscopy and immunohistochemical analysis; osteoblast-like cells were also cultured. The surface of the harvested area was analysed with scanning and conventional microscopy. There was no significant difference between mandibular and femoral bone in the size of particles harvested, but bone chips were significantly smaller when a drilling device had been used in both harvesting areas. Viability of cells in these smaller particles was significantly less than among cells harvested with a piezoelectrical device or Safescraper(®). Scanning microscopy showed a smooth bony surface where a drilling burr or piezoelectrical device had been used, whereas small disruptions were observed after the Safescraper(®) had been used. Harvesting of particulate bone is feasible using a drilling burr, piezoelectrical device, or Safescraper(®) from mandibular and femoral bone. The piezoelectrical device and the Safescraper(®) gave comparable results concerning the viability of osteoblast-like cells, and so are preferred to a drilling burr.

PMID:
19889486
DOI:
10.1016/j.bjoms.2009.09.012
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center