Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Oct;28(10):e201-e207. doi: 10.1111/clr.12986. Epub 2016 Oct 22.

Impact of biomaterial microtopography on bone regeneration: comparison of three hydroxyapatites.

Author information

1
Department of Periodontology and Oral Surgery, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
2
Dental Biomaterials Research Unit (d-BRU), Faculty of Medicine, University of Liege, Liège, Belgium.
3
Clinic of Oral Surgery, School of Dental Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
4
Inserm U957, Laboratory of Physiopathology of Bone Resorption, Faculty of Medicine, University of Nantes, Liège, France.
5
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
6
Regents University, Augusta, GA, USA.
7
Central Animal Facility, Giga-R, University of Liege, Liège, Belgium.

Abstract

AIMS:

The primary objective of this study was to compare the in vivo performance, namely in terms of quantity of newly formed bone and bone-to-material contact (osteoconductivity), of three hydroxyapatite-based biomaterials (HA) of different origins (natural or synthetic) or manufacturing process in a sinus lift model in rabbits. The secondary objective was to correlate the findings with the physical and topographical characteristics of the biomaterials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Two bovine HA manufactured with different processes (bovine hydroxyapatites [BHA] and cuttlebone hydroxyapatite [CBHA]) and a synthetic hydroxyapatite (SHA) sintered at high temperature were characterised with scanning electronic microscopy (SEM) and the measurement of specific surface area (BET). The materials were implanted in a sinus lift model in rabbits; histological and histomorphometric evaluation using non-decalcified sections was performed at 1, 5 and 12 weeks after implantation.

RESULTS:

The studied biomaterials displayed a different surface topography. The two natural HA displayed significantly higher bone quantities (P = 0.0017; BHA vs. SHA, P = 0.0018 and CBHA vs. SHA, P = 0.033) at 5 and 12 weeks compared to the synthetic one (SHA). Moreover, the osteoconductivity (bone-to-material contact) was significantly higher in the BHA group compared to the two other groups (P = 0.014; BHA vs. SHA, P = 0.023 and BHA vs. CBHA, P = 0.033).

CONCLUSION:

HA-based biomaterials from diverse origins and manufacturing processes displayed different topographical characteristics. This may have influenced different regenerated bone architecture observed; more bone was found with natural HA compared to the synthetic one, and significantly higher bone-to-material contacts were found with BHA.

KEYWORDS:

bone regeneration; hydroxyapatite; osteoconduction; surface characteristics

PMID:
27770468
DOI:
10.1111/clr.12986
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center