Biograft Block Hydroxyapatite

Kattimani, Vivekanand; Chakravarthi, P. Srinivas; Prasad, L Krishna

doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000002252

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of coralline porous hydroxyapatite block (PBHA) as a bone graft substitute in orthognathic and craniomaxillofacial surgery first described by Woldford et al [44]. In their report, Kattimani et al published promising results in the reconstruction of large mandibular defects with PBHA afterthe resection of benign tumors [45]. Additionally, several histomorphometrical studies showed that bone growth through PBHA grafts was completed with the maturation of the ingrown bone in 4 months [46,47].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Potential of Bacterial Adhesion on Block Bone Graft Materials

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone graft infections represent a challenge in daily clinics, resulting in increased patient discomfort and graft removal. The aim of this study was to investigate the initial adhesion of five representative pathogens on three different block bone graft materials (xenogeneic, alloplastic and allogeneic) and to assess if chlorhexidine (CHX) can effectively control the initial bacterial adhesion. Three different block bone grafting materials (Tutobone®, Endobon® and human spongiosa) were incubated with Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the presence or absence of 0.2% CHX solution. Bacterial adhesion was assessed by the direct counting of the colony-forming units (CFUs) and visualized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Overall, the selected bacterial species adhered successfully to all tested bone replacement scaffolds, which showed similar bacterial counts. The lg CFU values ranged from 5.29 ± 0.14 to 5.48 ± 0.72 for E. coli, from 4.37 ± 0.62 to 5.02 ± 0.48 for S. aureus, from 4.92 ± 0.34 to 4.95 ± 0.21 for S. mutans, from 4.97 ± 0.40 to 5.22 ± 0.13 for E. faecalis and from 4.23 ± 0.54 to 4.58 ± 0.26 for P. aeruginosa. CHX did not interfere with initial microbial adhesion, and yet it killed all adhered bacterial cells. Thus, CHX can be used to prevent subsequent biofilm infections.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Potential of Bacterial Adhesion on Block Bone Graft Materials

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The volume needed for the reconstruction of maxillofacial defects without causing secondary morbidity in a patient with an autogenous graft is difficult to acquire, so alternative bone substitute materials have been investigated for a long time1. The cost involved for synthetic materials and autogenous grafting is not affordable to the common man, so the search for an economical ideal substitute material is ongoing4. In the recent past, eggshell derivatives have been assessed as scaffold materials11121314.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Biomaterials are used as biocompatible scaffold systems, which allow the migration, proliferation, and differentiation of either resident or externally delivered cells to promote new bone formation1234. A wide variety of biomaterials have been used for craniofacial bone augmentation134. These can be divided into organic and inorganic materials, where calcium phosphate bioceramics represent most inorganic scaffolds13.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural bioceramics: our experience with changing perspectives in the reconstruction of maxillofacial skeleton

Kattimani

Lingamaneni

2019

J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Various bone graft substitute materials are used to enhance bone regeneration in the maxillofacial skeleton. In the recent past, synthetic graft materials have been produced using various synthetic and natural calcium precursors. Very recently, eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite (EHA) has been evaluated as a synthetic bone graft substitute. To assess bone regeneration using EHA in cystic and/or apicectomy defects of the jaws through clinical and radiographic evaluations. Materials and Methods A total of 20 patients were enrolled in the study protocol (CTRI/2014/12/005340) and were followed up at 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks to assess the amount of osseous fill through digital radiographs/cone-beam computed tomography along with clinical parameters and complications. Wilcoxon matched pairs test, means, percentages and standard deviations were used for the statistical analysis. Results The sizes of the lesions in the study ranged from 1 to 4 cm and involved one to four teeth. The study showed significant changes in the formation of bone, the merging of material and the surgical site margins from the first week to the first month in all patients (age range, 15-50 years) irrespective of the size of the lesions and the number of teeth involved. Bone formation was statistically significant from the fourth to the eighth week, and the trabecular pattern was observed by the end of 12 weeks with uneventful wound healing. Conclusion EHA showed enhancement of bone regeneration, and healing was complete by the end of 12 weeks with a trabecular pattern in all patients irrespective of the size of the lesion involved. The study showed enhancement of bone regeneration in the early bone formative stage within 12 weeks after grafting. EHA is cost effective and production is environment friendly with no disease transfer risks. Thus, natural bioceramics will play an important role in the reduction of costs involved in grafting and reconstruction.

show abstract

“…One publication (8%) studied the frontal region ( 31 ). Further, there were five studies (42%) that included multiple facial regions ( 19 , 20 , 24 , 26 , 33 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancements in facial implantology: a review of hydroxyapatite applications and outcomes

Kauke-Navarro,

Knoedler,

Knoedler

et al. 2024

Front. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe search for an ideal bone substitute in reconstructive surgery has led to the exploration of various materials, with hydroxyapatite (HaP) emerging as a promising candidate due to its biocompatibility, osteoconductive properties, and structural similarity to human bone. Despite its potential, there is a paucity of data on the long-term safety and efficacy of HaP in facial skeletal reconstruction and augmentation.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases for studies on hydroxyapatite facial implants in reconstruction and augmentation.ResultsOur search yielded 12 studies that met our inclusion criteria, encompassing 74 patients treated with HaP implants for various indications including facial fractures/defects, aesthetic facial balancing, and after tumor resection. The studies reported on outcomes such as implant integration, complications, aesthetic results, and patient satisfaction, with a general trend indicating positive outcomes for the use of HaP in facial reconstruction.ConclusionHydroxyapatite appears to be a viable and effective material for facial skeletal reconstruction and augmentation, offering benefits in terms of biocompatibility, osteoconductivity, and patient outcomes. However, limitations such as low mechanical strength and the need for further research on long-term safety and efficacy were identified. This review underscores the potential of HaP in craniofacial surgery while highlighting areas for future investigation.

show abstract

Biograft Block Hydroxyapatite

Cited by 11 publications

References 63 publications

High Potential of Bacterial Adhesion on Block Bone Graft Materials

High Potential of Bacterial Adhesion on Block Bone Graft Materials

Natural bioceramics: our experience with changing perspectives in the reconstruction of maxillofacial skeleton

Advancements in facial implantology: a review of hydroxyapatite applications and outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About