Premium
In vivo comparison of synthetic osseous graft materials
Author(s) -
MacNeill Simon R.,
Cobb Charles M.,
Rapley John W.,
Glaros Alan G.,
Spencer Paulette
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1034/j.1600-051x.1999.260407.x
Subject(s) - in vivo , hydroxylapatite , dentistry , bone grafting , bone healing , artificial bone , osteotomy , bone formation , medicine , surgery , chemistry , biology , biomedical engineering , microbiology and biotechnology , biochemistry , enzyme
. The purpose of this study was to compare the in vivo osseous healing response of 4 commercially‐available synthetic bone grafting materials; hydroxylapatite (HA), calcium sulfate (CaSO4) plus autogenous bone, or a bioactive glass ceramic: with particle size of 300–360 μm (BG1) or 90 to 710 μm (BG2). 4 osteotomy sites were prepared in each tibia of 10 adult male rabbits. One unfilled osteotomy site served as negative control (NC) and another site filled with autogenous bone was the positive control (PC). All animals received BG1 in 2 sites and BG2 in 2 sites. 5 animals received HA and five CaSO4 plus autogenous bone in the remaining 2 sites. Animals were sacrificed at 28 days post‐surgery, histologic sections obtained and the % surface area of new bone formation for each material was determined by computerized image analysis. All graft sites showed evidence of bone formation, i.e., (NC) 41.95%; (PC) 50.41%; (BG1) 41.82%; (BG2) 40.36%; (HA) 41.83% and (CaSO4) 58.83%. Statistical analysis using an ANOVA with repeated measures on the materials common to all animals (excluding HA and CaSO4 groups) showed significant differences between materials in surface area of bone, with positive controls better than negative controls, and BG1 and BG2 not significantly different from the negative control. These results indicate that synthetic graft materials can support new bone formation in surgically prepared defects. The utility of a rabbit model for studying physiologic osseous turnover and healing is questioned for studies of slowly resorbing synthetic graft materials.