Evaluation of Bone Formation After Grafting With Deproteinized Bovine Bone and Mineralized Allogenic Bone

Moon, Kyung-Nam; Kim, Su-Gwan; Oh, Jaewon; Kim, Chun-Sung; Lim, Sung‐Chul; Jeong, Mi‐Ae

doi:10.1097/id.0000000000000185

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Commercially available TPAs are generated by a combination of chemical and physical treatment steps including sonication, acetone treatment, osmotic treatment, sterilization via hydrogen peroxide solutions, serial dehydration and gamma irradiation [31, 43]. BPXs differ from all other grafts as they originate from a bovine source and are treated with heat (300°C), alkaline chemicals and sterilization using dry heart [43]. This process is supposed to remove any proteins or antigenic structures [44].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of bone allograft processing methods: Impact on decellularization efficacy, biocompatibility and mesenchymal stem cell functionality

Rasch¹,

Naujokat²,

Wang³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an ever-aging society the demand for bone-defect filling grafts continues to gain in importance. While autologous grafting still prevails as the gold standard, allografts and xenografts present viable alternatives with promising results. Physiochemical properties of a graft strongly depend on the processing method such as the decellularization protocol. In addition, the physiochemical characteristics are critical factors for a successful integration of the graft after the implantation and might influence mesenchymal stem cell function in therapeutic approaches combining grafts and autologous mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Several decellularization methods have been proposed, however it still remains unclear which method results in favorable physiochemical properties or might be preferred in stem cell applications. In the first part of this study we compared two decellularization approaches resulting in chemically processed allografts (CPAs) or sonication-based processed allografts (SPAs). Each decellularization approach was compared for its decellularization efficacy and its influence on the grafts’ surface texture and composition. In the second part of this study biocompatibility of grafts was assessed by testing the effect of extraction medium on MSC viability and comparing them to commercially available allografts and xenografts. Additionally, grafts’ performance in terms of MSC functionality was assessed by reseeding with MSCs pre-differentiated in osteogenic medium and determining cell adhesion, proliferation, as well as alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity and the degree of mineralization. In summary, results indicate a more effective decellularization for the SPA approach in comparison to the CPA approach. Even though SPA extracts induced a decrease in MSC viability, MSC performance after reseeding was comparable to commercially available grafts based on DNA quantification, alkaline phosphatase activity and quantification of mineralization. Commercial Tutoplast allografts showed overall the best effects on MSC functionality as indicated by extraction biocompatibility testing as well as by comparing proliferation and osteogenic differentiation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of bone allograft processing methods: Impact on decellularization efficacy, biocompatibility and mesenchymal stem cell functionality

Rasch¹,

Naujokat²,

Wang³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because the bony remodeling of graft bone may take a long period more than 3-6 months, the pathological examination of graft bone is seldom performed, if there appeared no clinical symptom. However, it has been known that the inserted graft bone particles are not completely resorbed and remodeled by new bone replacement 16,17) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The immunohistochemical study was subsequently performed using different antisera of odontogenic markers (amelogenin* and ameloblastin*), proliferating cell marker (proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA*)), cytokeratin (pancytokeratins (pan-K*, cytokeratins No. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8,11,14,16,17,18)), growth factor (epithelial growth factor (EGF # ) and epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR # )), protective protein (heat shock protein-70 (HSP-70 @ )), and oncogenes (phosphorylated V-akt murine thymoma viral oncogene homolog (pAKT*, phosphory-lated at Thr 308), 14-3-3*, survivin*, and p53*). (*Santa Cruz Biotech., USA; # NEOMARKERS,USA; @ DAKO, Denmark)…”

Section: ⅱ Case Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dysplastic Proliferation of Odontogenic Epithelium on the Xenograft Bones Inserted for Dental Implant

Lee¹,

Kim²,

Lee³

2015

Korean J. Oral Maxillofac. Pathol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 57 years old female received xenogenic bone graft for the extraction socket augmentation of right maxillary molars and for the sinus floor elevation six months ago. The bone graft sites were healed uneventfully and showed marked radiopacity in the postoperative X-ray view. Before dental implant insertion the bone biopsy was made using trephine bur and examined pathologically. The graft bones showed minimum new bone deposition with dysplastic epithelium. The epithelium was proliferative on the surface of graft bones forming epithelial strands and nests, similar to the odontogenic epithelium. The immunohistochemical study was performed using different antisera of odontogenic markers, growth factors, oncogenes, etc. The epithelial cells were strongly positive for pan-keratins, EGF, pAKT, and HSP-70, consistently positive for PCNA, p53, EGFR, 14-3-3, and survivin, slightly positive for ameloblastin, but rarely positive for amelogenin. Particularly the matrix of graft bone was slightly positive for EGF. Taken together, it is presumed that the abnormal epithelium on the graft bones was derived from odontogenic epithelial elements, Malassez epithelial rests, distributed at the periodontal tissue of maxillary molars, and that they might undergo dysplastic proliferation affected by the release of growth factors and osteogenic proteins from the graft bones. It is also suggested that the graft bone substitutes inserted for the dental implant possibly have a potential to induce the proliferation of odontogenic epithelial rests leading to the pathogenesis of odontogenic cysts and tumors.

show abstract

“…Nesse sentido, um dos biomateriais mais utilizados com grande sucesso em cirurgias ósseas, como alternativa ao osso autógeno, é o osso inorgânico ou anorgânico comercialmente conhecido com o nome de Bio-Oss ® (OLIVEIRA et al, 2015). O Bio-Oss ® é uma hidroxiapatita natural porosa obtida por desproteinização de osso esponjoso bovino a temperatura de 300°C, com arquitetura do osso que lhe deu origem, ou seja, estrutura trabecular e muitos espaços intertrabeculares (poros) e alta capacidade osteocondutora (MOON et al, 2015b).…”

Section: Sacrifício Dos Animais E Obtenção Das Peçasunclassified

“…Deste modo, na presente pesquisa decidiu-se utilizar o osso autógeno e o Bio-Oss ® como parâmetro de comparação com a biocerâmica bifásica HA/TCPp 70/30 porosa testada aqui. Cumpre salientar que muitos estudos têm utilizado o enxerto autógeno (SCHLEGEL et al, 2003;SICCA et al, 2008), o Bio-Oss ® (CORDARO et al, 2008;MOON et al, 2015aMOON et al, , 2015b, ou ambos (DE SOUZA NUNES et al, 2010;LAMBERT et al, 2011) para comparações com diversos biomateriais.…”

Section: Sacrifício Dos Animais E Obtenção Das Peçasunclassified

Avaliação comparativa da neoformação óssea após enxertia de HA/TCPp, Bio-Oss e osso autógeno associados ou não ao PRP em cirurgias de levantamento de seio maxilar de coelhos

Rocha¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ao meu orientador Prof. Dr. Rumio Taga, que permitiu a realização deste trabalho, sempre disposto aos questionamentos, orientação e compreensão. Muito obrigada pelos ensinamentos transmitidos durantes todos os anos de orientação. Minha eterna gratidão pelos votos de confiança depositados desde o início da minha graduação com a iniciação científica. Eu o admiro pela sabedoria e paciência. Foi uma honra tê-lo como meu orientador. À minha "co-orientadora" Dra. Tania Mary Cestari obrigada por toda sua atenção, paciência e amizade. Sempre disposta a ajudar, apoiando-me em todos os momentos de necessidade. Você é um exemplo de determinação! Obrigada por todo conhecimento transmitido. Serei eternamente grata a você.

show abstract

Evaluation of Bone Formation After Grafting With Deproteinized Bovine Bone and Mineralized Allogenic Bone

Abstract: Although Tutoplast and Bio-Oss graft materials seem to be useful for bone grafts, Tutoplast showed more active new bone formation than Bio-Oss.

Cited by 7 publications

References 24 publications

Evaluation of bone allograft processing methods: Impact on decellularization efficacy, biocompatibility and mesenchymal stem cell functionality

Evaluation of bone allograft processing methods: Impact on decellularization efficacy, biocompatibility and mesenchymal stem cell functionality

Dysplastic Proliferation of Odontogenic Epithelium on the Xenograft Bones Inserted for Dental Implant

Avaliação comparativa da neoformação óssea após enxertia de HA/TCPp, Bio-Oss e osso autógeno associados ou não ao PRP em cirurgias de levantamento de seio maxilar de coelhos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About