Clinical Case Employing Two Different Biomaterials in Bone Regeneration

Abstract

<jats:p>The case of a 59-year-old woman lacking bone in the lower left side of her mandible, and treated with two different biomaterials for bone regeneration, is reported here. Specifically, two different anatomical sites damaged by two different pathologies were studied: a radicular fracture and peri-implantitis. The sites were treated via xenograft bone substitute and calcium phosphosilicate, respectively. Follow-up evaluations showed that the two different methodologies employing different materials in the same organism undergoing the same metabolic processes achieved the same good results. This represents a significant change in current surgical strategies for the dental region: instead of focusing on a single gold-standard technique, it is possible to follow a hybrid approach by adapting the biomaterial and the protocol used to the specificities of the defect.</jats:p>

Comparison of the healing process of xenografts with three different sources in critical-size bone defects: An in vivo study

“… 12 - 14 However, patient morbidity, additional surgery, and limited graft availability have decreased its use. 2 , 12 , 13 Allograft, another alternative, is available in different sizes and has resolved some of the drawbacks. However, it has some disadvantages, including the risk of disease transmission, rapid resorption, donor limitation, and immune response.…”

“…Because of the differences in xenograft sources and preparation methods, xenograft bone substitutes may represent a variety of behaviors in clinical use. 2 , 13 Moreover, no study has compared the ability of xenografts with different sources in bone healing in CSDs. Therefore, the present in vivo study compared and evaluated bone regeneration of CSDs in rabbit calvaria after using three types of xenografts with different sources.…”

Sterility and bioactivity evaluation of two types of bone graft substitutes after removing the original packaging

“…3,4 Although autogenous bone grafts are still considered the gold standard, some shortcomings limit their use. [4][5][6] Allografts are the second substitutes that have overcome some drawbacks but still have disadvantages, including limited supply and inappropriate sterilization methods. 7,8 Xenograft materials are prepared following the removal of antigens and organic matter from species other than humans.…”