{"title":"比较 Bone+B® 异种移植骨材料和 InterOss® 异种移植骨材料对兔小腿骨缺损再生的影响。","authors":"Afshin Yadegari Naini, Sepehr Kobravi, Aida Jafari, Mohammadhassan Lotfalizadeh, Narges Lotfalizadeh, Sareh Farhadi","doi":"10.1002/cre2.875","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The bone regeneration therapy is often used in patients with inadequate bone support for implants, particularly following tooth extractions. Xenografts derived from animal tissues are effective bone reconstructive options that resist resorption and pose a low risk of transmitting disease. Therefore, these implants may be a good option for enhancing and stabilizing maxillary sinuses. The purpose of this study was to compare two xenografts, Bone<sup>+</sup>B® and InterOss®, for the reconstruction of rabbit calvaria defects.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and Materials</h3>\n \n <p>The study involved seven male New Zealand white rabbits. In the surgical procedure, 21 spots were created on both sides of the midline calvarium by creating three 8-millimeter defects. A control group was used, as well as two treatment groups utilizing Bone<sup>+</sup>B® Grafts and InterOss® Grafts. After 3 months, the rabbits were euthanized, followed by pathological evaluation. Analysis of these samples focused on bone formation, xenograft remaining material, and inflammation levels, using Adobe Photoshop CS 8.0 and SPSS version 24.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>With the application of Bone<sup>+</sup>B® graft, bone formation ranged from 32% to 45%, with a mean of 37.80% (±5.63), and the remaining material ranged from 28% to 37%, with a mean of 32.60% (±3.65). Using InterOss® grafts, bone formation was 61% to 75%, the mean was 65.83% (±4.75), and the remaining material was 9% to 18%, with a mean of 13.17% (±3.06). The bone formation in the control group ranged from 10% to 25%, with a mean of 17.17% (±6.11). InterOss® had lower inflammation levels than other groups, but the difference was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> > .05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>InterOss® bone powder is the best option for maxillofacial surgery and bone reconstruction. This is due to more bone formation, less remaining material, and a lower inflammation level. Compared to the control group, Bone<sup>+</sup>B® improves healing and bone quality, thus making it an alternative to InterOss®.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10203,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Dental Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cre2.875","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the effects of Bone+B® xenograft and InterOss® xenograft bone material on rabbit calvaria bone defect regeneration\",\"authors\":\"Afshin Yadegari Naini, Sepehr Kobravi, Aida Jafari, Mohammadhassan Lotfalizadeh, Narges Lotfalizadeh, Sareh Farhadi\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cre2.875\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>The bone regeneration therapy is often used in patients with inadequate bone support for implants, particularly following tooth extractions. Xenografts derived from animal tissues are effective bone reconstructive options that resist resorption and pose a low risk of transmitting disease. Therefore, these implants may be a good option for enhancing and stabilizing maxillary sinuses. The purpose of this study was to compare two xenografts, Bone<sup>+</sup>B® and InterOss®, for the reconstruction of rabbit calvaria defects.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and Materials</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study involved seven male New Zealand white rabbits. In the surgical procedure, 21 spots were created on both sides of the midline calvarium by creating three 8-millimeter defects. A control group was used, as well as two treatment groups utilizing Bone<sup>+</sup>B® Grafts and InterOss® Grafts. After 3 months, the rabbits were euthanized, followed by pathological evaluation. Analysis of these samples focused on bone formation, xenograft remaining material, and inflammation levels, using Adobe Photoshop CS 8.0 and SPSS version 24.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>With the application of Bone<sup>+</sup>B® graft, bone formation ranged from 32% to 45%, with a mean of 37.80% (±5.63), and the remaining material ranged from 28% to 37%, with a mean of 32.60% (±3.65). Using InterOss® grafts, bone formation was 61% to 75%, the mean was 65.83% (±4.75), and the remaining material was 9% to 18%, with a mean of 13.17% (±3.06). The bone formation in the control group ranged from 10% to 25%, with a mean of 17.17% (±6.11). InterOss® had lower inflammation levels than other groups, but the difference was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> > .05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>InterOss® bone powder is the best option for maxillofacial surgery and bone reconstruction. This is due to more bone formation, less remaining material, and a lower inflammation level. Compared to the control group, Bone<sup>+</sup>B® improves healing and bone quality, thus making it an alternative to InterOss®.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10203,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical and Experimental Dental Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cre2.875\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical and Experimental Dental Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cre2.875\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Dental Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cre2.875","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing the effects of Bone+B® xenograft and InterOss® xenograft bone material on rabbit calvaria bone defect regeneration
Background
The bone regeneration therapy is often used in patients with inadequate bone support for implants, particularly following tooth extractions. Xenografts derived from animal tissues are effective bone reconstructive options that resist resorption and pose a low risk of transmitting disease. Therefore, these implants may be a good option for enhancing and stabilizing maxillary sinuses. The purpose of this study was to compare two xenografts, Bone+B® and InterOss®, for the reconstruction of rabbit calvaria defects.
Methods and Materials
The study involved seven male New Zealand white rabbits. In the surgical procedure, 21 spots were created on both sides of the midline calvarium by creating three 8-millimeter defects. A control group was used, as well as two treatment groups utilizing Bone+B® Grafts and InterOss® Grafts. After 3 months, the rabbits were euthanized, followed by pathological evaluation. Analysis of these samples focused on bone formation, xenograft remaining material, and inflammation levels, using Adobe Photoshop CS 8.0 and SPSS version 24.
Results
With the application of Bone+B® graft, bone formation ranged from 32% to 45%, with a mean of 37.80% (±5.63), and the remaining material ranged from 28% to 37%, with a mean of 32.60% (±3.65). Using InterOss® grafts, bone formation was 61% to 75%, the mean was 65.83% (±4.75), and the remaining material was 9% to 18%, with a mean of 13.17% (±3.06). The bone formation in the control group ranged from 10% to 25%, with a mean of 17.17% (±6.11). InterOss® had lower inflammation levels than other groups, but the difference was not statistically significant (p > .05).
Conclusion
InterOss® bone powder is the best option for maxillofacial surgery and bone reconstruction. This is due to more bone formation, less remaining material, and a lower inflammation level. Compared to the control group, Bone+B® improves healing and bone quality, thus making it an alternative to InterOss®.
期刊介绍：
Clinical and Experimental Dental Research aims to provide open access peer-reviewed publications of high scientific quality representing original clinical, diagnostic or experimental work within all disciplines and fields of oral medicine and dentistry. The scope of Clinical and Experimental Dental Research comprises original research material on the anatomy, physiology and pathology of oro-facial, oro-pharyngeal and maxillofacial tissues, and functions and dysfunctions within the stomatognathic system, and the epidemiology, aetiology, prevention, diagnosis, prognosis and therapy of diseases and conditions that have an effect on the homeostasis of the mouth, jaws, and closely associated structures, as well as the healing and regeneration and the clinical aspects of replacement of hard and soft tissues with biomaterials, and the rehabilitation of stomatognathic functions. Studies that bring new knowledge on how to advance health on the individual or public health levels, including interactions between oral and general health and ill-health are welcome.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
