Premium
Effectiveness of strontium‐doped brushite, bovine‐derived hydroxyapatite and synthetic hydroxyapatite in rabbit sinus augmentation with simultaneous implant installation
Author(s) -
Lu DaZhuang,
Zhang YanBo,
Dong Wei,
Bi WenJuan,
Feng XiaoJie,
Wen LiMing,
Sun Hong,
Chen Hui,
Zang LuYang,
Qi MengChun
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of biomedical materials research part b: applied biomaterials
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.665
H-Index - 108
eISSN - 1552-4981
pISSN - 1552-4973
DOI - 10.1002/jbm.b.34675
Subject(s) - resorption , brushite , maxillary sinus , dental alveolus , bone resorption , implant , biomedical engineering , strontium , sinus (botany) , dentistry , materials science , chemistry , medicine , surgery , pathology , calcium , biology , organic chemistry , metallurgy , botany , genus
Various bone substitutes have been applied in sinus augmentation (SA) to overcome insufficient bone height at the posterior maxilla region caused by pneumatized sinus and severe alveolar bone resorption after teeth loss. However, their effectiveness in SA needs to be further elucidated. In this study, strontium‐doped brushite (Sr‐DCPD), a new bone substitute, together with bovine‐derived hydroxyapatite (bHA) and synthetic hydroxyapatite (sHA) was used in rabbit maxillary SA with simultaneous implant installation. The sinus space‐keeping capacity, resorption rate, osteoconductivity, and mechanical properties of regenerated bone, were evaluated by micro‐computed tomography (CT), histological analysis, and mechanical testing. Sr‐DCPD exhibited the best osteoconductivity and new bone formation (<4 weeks), but its final bone regeneration and removal torque of implants at week 12 were the lowest, mainly due to its poor space‐keeping capacity and fast resorption. bHA exhibited the best space‐keeping capacity and slowest resorption rate, but relative lower final bone volume and mechanical properties, while sHA showed good space‐keeping capacity, slower resorption rate, and the best final bone formation and mechanical properties. sHA was most effective for SA and bHA was also an acceptable bone substitute; however, Sr‐DCPD was least effective and not suitable in SA by itself.