Premium
Combination of a biomolecule‐aided biphasic cryogel scaffold with a barrier membrane adhering PDGF‐encapsulated nanofibers to promote periodontal regeneration
Author(s) -
Huang RenYeong,
Tai WeiChiu,
Ho MingHua,
Chang PoChun
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of periodontal research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.31
H-Index - 83
eISSN - 1600-0765
pISSN - 0022-3484
DOI - 10.1111/jre.12740
Subject(s) - cementum , nanofiber , barrier membrane , periodontal fiber , materials science , gelatin , regeneration (biology) , scaffold , biomedical engineering , biocompatibility , membrane , chemistry , dentistry , dentin , biology , microbiology and biotechnology , medicine , nanotechnology , biochemistry , composite material , metallurgy
Abstract Objective and Background To achieve periodontal regeneration, numerous investigations have concentrated on biomolecule supplement and optimization of bone substitute or barrier membrane. This study evaluated the benefit of combining these strategies for periodontal regeneration. Methods Biphasic cryogel scaffold (BCS) composed of gelatin (ligament phase) and gelatin with beta‐tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite (BH) (bone phase) was designed as tested bone substitute, and both enamel matrix derivatives (EMD) and bone morphogenetic protein‐2 (BMP‐2) were applied to formulate a biomolecule‐aided BCS (BBS). Functionally graded membrane (FGM) was designed as tested barrier membrane by adhering PDGF‐encapsulated poly(L‐lactide‐co‐D/L‐lactide) nanofibers on the conventional membrane (CM). BBS and FGM were characterized and tested for biocompatibility in vitro. Thirty 4 × 4 × 5 mm 3 periodontal intrabony defects were created on 6 Beagle dogs. Each defect was evenly assigned to one of the following treatments including BH‐CM, BCS‐CM, BBS‐CM, BH‐FGM, BCS‐FGM, and BBS‐FGM, for 12 weeks. The therapeutic efficiency was assessed by micro‐CT and histology. Results BCS and FGM sustained the release of biomolecules. The viability of MSCs was maintained in both phases of BCS and was promoted while seeding on the PDGF‐encapsulated nanofibers. In CM‐covered sites, BBS showed significantly greater osteogenesis ( P < .01) and early defect fill ( P < .05) relative to BH. FGM significantly promoted osteogenesis ( P < .05) in BH‐treated sites but showed limited benefit in BBS‐treated sites. On denuded roots, cementum deposition was evident in BBS‐treated sites. Conclusions PDGF‐loaded FGM promoted periodontal osteogenesis, and BBS with EMD‐BMP‐2 had potential for reconstructing alveolar ridge, periodontal ligament, and cementum. FGM and BBS combination provided limited additional benefit.