Effect of Membrane Fixation and the Graft Combinations on Horizontal Bone Regeneration: Radiographic and Histologic Outcomes in a Canine Model.

IF 8.1 Q1 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Biomaterials research Pub Date : 2024-07-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.34133/bmr.0055
Jeong-Won Paik, Yoon-Hee Kwon, Jin-Young Park, Ronald E Jung, Ui-Won Jung, Daniel S Thoma
{"title":"Effect of Membrane Fixation and the Graft Combinations on Horizontal Bone Regeneration: Radiographic and Histologic Outcomes in a Canine Model.","authors":"Jeong-Won Paik, Yoon-Hee Kwon, Jin-Young Park, Ronald E Jung, Ui-Won Jung, Daniel S Thoma","doi":"10.34133/bmr.0055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study was to determine the effect of membrane fixation and combinations of bone substitute materials and barrier membranes on horizontal bone regeneration in peri-implant defects. Eight mongrel dogs underwent chronic buccal peri-implant dehiscence defects creation and were randomized into 4 groups: (a) deproteinized bovine bone mineral 1 (DBBM1) with a native collagen membrane (CM) (BB group, positive control group), (b) DBBM1 with native CM and 2 fixation pins (BBP group), (c) DBBM2 with a cross-linked CM (XC group), and (d) DBBM2 with cross-linked CM and 2 fixation pins (XCP group). Following 16 weeks of healing, tissues were radiographically and histomorphometrically analyzed. The total augmented area was significantly larger in the BBP, XC, and XCP groups compared to the BB group (4.27 ± 3.21, 7.17 ± 7.23, and 6.91 ± 5.45 mm<sup>2</sup> versus 1.35 ± 1.28 mm<sup>2</sup>, respectively; <i>P</i> = 0.022). No significant difference for the augmented tissue thickness was observed among the 4 groups. The augmented tissue thickness measured at 3 mm below the implant shoulder was higher in BBP, XC, and XCP than that in BB (2.43 ± 1.53, 2.62 ± 1.80, and 3.18 ± 1.96 mm versus 0.80 ± 0.90 mm, respectively), trending toward significance (<i>P</i> = 0.052). DBBM2 and a cross-linked CM were significantly more favorable for horizontal bone regeneration compared to DBBM1 and a native CM. However, when DBBM1 and a native CM were secured with fixation pins, outcomes were similar. The addition of pins did not lead to more favorable outcomes when a cross-linked CM was used.</p>","PeriodicalId":93902,"journal":{"name":"Biomaterials research","volume":"28 ","pages":"0055"},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11284130/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomaterials research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34133/bmr.0055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of membrane fixation and combinations of bone substitute materials and barrier membranes on horizontal bone regeneration in peri-implant defects. Eight mongrel dogs underwent chronic buccal peri-implant dehiscence defects creation and were randomized into 4 groups: (a) deproteinized bovine bone mineral 1 (DBBM1) with a native collagen membrane (CM) (BB group, positive control group), (b) DBBM1 with native CM and 2 fixation pins (BBP group), (c) DBBM2 with a cross-linked CM (XC group), and (d) DBBM2 with cross-linked CM and 2 fixation pins (XCP group). Following 16 weeks of healing, tissues were radiographically and histomorphometrically analyzed. The total augmented area was significantly larger in the BBP, XC, and XCP groups compared to the BB group (4.27 ± 3.21, 7.17 ± 7.23, and 6.91 ± 5.45 mm2 versus 1.35 ± 1.28 mm2, respectively; P = 0.022). No significant difference for the augmented tissue thickness was observed among the 4 groups. The augmented tissue thickness measured at 3 mm below the implant shoulder was higher in BBP, XC, and XCP than that in BB (2.43 ± 1.53, 2.62 ± 1.80, and 3.18 ± 1.96 mm versus 0.80 ± 0.90 mm, respectively), trending toward significance (P = 0.052). DBBM2 and a cross-linked CM were significantly more favorable for horizontal bone regeneration compared to DBBM1 and a native CM. However, when DBBM1 and a native CM were secured with fixation pins, outcomes were similar. The addition of pins did not lead to more favorable outcomes when a cross-linked CM was used.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
膜固定和移植物组合对水平骨再生的影响:犬模型的放射学和组织学结果
本研究旨在确定膜固定以及骨替代材料和隔离膜组合对种植体周围缺损水平骨再生的影响。8 只杂种狗接受了慢性颊面种植体周围开裂缺损修复,并随机分为 4 组:(a) 带有原生胶原膜 (CM) 的去蛋白牛骨矿物质 1(DBBM1)(BB 组,阳性对照组);(b) 带有原生 CM 和 2 个固定针的 DBBM1(BBP 组);(c) 带有交联 CM 的 DBBM2(XC 组);(d) 带有交联 CM 和 2 个固定针的 DBBM2(XCP 组)。愈合 16 周后,对组织进行放射学和组织形态学分析。与 BB 组相比,BBP、XC 和 XCP 组的总增量面积明显更大(分别为 4.27 ± 3.21、7.17 ± 7.23 和 6.91 ± 5.45 mm2 对 1.35 ± 1.28 mm2;P = 0.022)。4 组患者的增生组织厚度无明显差异。BBP、XC 和 XCP 在种植体肩部下方 3 mm 处测量的增生组织厚度高于 BB 组(分别为 2.43 ± 1.53、2.62 ± 1.80 和 3.18 ± 1.96 mm 对 0.80 ± 0.90 mm),呈显著性趋势(P = 0.052)。与 DBBM1 和原生 CM 相比,DBBM2 和交联 CM 更有利于水平骨再生。然而,当 DBBM1 和本地 CM 用固定钉固定时,结果是相似的。在使用交联CM时,增加固定钉并不会带来更有利的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
From Bench to Bedside: The Role of Extracellular Vesicles in Cartilage Injury Treatment. Water-Dispersible and Biocompatible Polymer-Based Organic Upconversion Nanoparticles for Transdermal Delivery. A Flexible Membrane May Improve Bone Regeneration by Increasing Hydrophilicity and Conformability in Lateral Bone Augmentation. Hollow Bismuth Nanoparticle-Loaded Gelatin Hydrogel Regulates M2 Polarization of Macrophages to Promote Infected Wound Healing. Pulmonary Delivery of Anti-microRNA Oligonucleotide and Glycyrrhizic Acid Using Ternary Peptide Micelles for the Treatment of Acute Lung Injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1