Histological evaluation of extraction sites grafted with Bio-Oss Collagen: Randomized controlled trial

Keil, Christiane; Gollmer, Barbara; Zeidler-Rentzsch, Ines; Gredes, Tomasz; Heinemann, Friedhelm

doi:10.1016/j.aanat.2021.151722

Cited by 21 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the last decades, the literature concerning the deproteinized bovine bone has been extensive and increasing [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. It suggests several and undoubted advantages, such as the potentially infinite quantity of material that can be used and the absence of further and more complex surgical interventions to obtain it.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Custom Bone Regeneration (CBR): An Alternative Method of Bone Augmentation—A Case Series Study

Santis

Luciano

Dario

et al. 2022

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We performed this clinical study in order to evaluate the reliability of the Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) surgical technique through the use of customized CAD CAM titanium meshes (Yxoss CBR® Reoss) in order to show an alternative method of bone augmentation. Materials and methods: Nine patients presenting 10 bone defects were referred to solve oral dysfunction due to edentulous atrophic ridges. Guided bone regeneration was performed with titanium meshes combined with autogenous bone grafting and heterologous bovine bone mineral grafting, and exclusively a “poncho technique” soft tissue approach for all the cases. After a mean 9 months of graft healing (range 6–12 months), titanium meshes were removed, and implant surgery was subsequently performed. The results we obtained were positive in terms of volumetric increases in height, length and thickness of the atrophic ridges without biological complications detectable before implant surgery. Results: Out of nine, one site met titanium mesh exposure: however, in all 10 sites a three-dimensional volumetric bone implementation was obtained. The statistical results were estimated by uploading and superimposing cbct scans before and after CBR surgery for each patient, so it was possible evaluate the maximum linear vertical and horizontal bone gain through dedicated Cad Cam software (Exocad GmbH®). The average horizontal gain was 6.37 ± 2.17 mm (range 2.78–9.12 mm) and vertical gain was 5.95 ± 2.06 mm (range 2.68–9.02 mm). A total of 18 implants were placed into the grafted sites with a 100% survival rate (clearly they are relative percentages to be compared to the short time elapsed). Conclusions: The results we obtained in this study suggest that this CBR procedure (Yxoss® by Reoss) is reliable and safe for bone regeneration to allow implant-prosthetic restoration in horizontal, vertical and combined bone defects. The soft tissue management is diriment: all the cases were managed with a “poncho” flap approach to decrease exposure complication.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Custom Bone Regeneration (CBR): An Alternative Method of Bone Augmentation—A Case Series Study

Santis

Luciano

Dario

et al. 2022

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of greatest advances in dental bone regenerative dentistry is the ability to replace damaged or missing teeth through implants and prosthetic crowns [5][6][7]. However, before the implants can be placed in the defect site, sufficient bone volume is often needed to provide long term stabilization of the implant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Study of Two Bone Graft Substitutes—InterOss® Collagen and OCS-B Collagen®

Jain¹,

Blaauw²,

Chang³

2022

JFB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone is a complex hierarchical tissue composed of organic and inorganic materials that provide structure, support, and protection to organs. However, there are some critical size defects that are unable to regenerate on their own and therefore require clinical repair. Bone graft substitutes allow repair by providing a temporary resorbable device. Among the common filler materials that aid in regeneration is hydroxyapatite particles of either animal or human origin which is used to fill or reconstruct periodontal and bony defects in the mouth. However, particulate graft substitutes suffer from localized migration away from the implantation site, necessitating the use of a barrier membrane. In this study, we designed InterOss Collagen, combining bovine hydroxyapatite granules with porcine-skin derived collagen to form a bone filler composite. Physiochemical properties of InterOss Collagen and a commercially available product, OsteoConductive Substitute-Bovine(OCS-B) Collagen, referred to as OCS-B Collagen, were examined. We found two bone graft substitutes to be mostly similar, though InterOss Collagen showed comparatively higher surface area and porosity. We conducted an in vivo study in rabbits to evaluate local tissue responses, percent material resorption and bone formation and showed that the two materials exhibited similar degradation profiles, inflammatory and healing responses following implantation. Based on these results, InterOss Collagen is a promising dental bone grafting material for periodontal and maxillofacial surgeries.

show abstract

“…Different products of xenogeneic origin supplemented with collagen are currently available to improve its biological activity in enhancing regenerative properties. Collagen incorporation into xenografts occurs since collagen is the main extracellular matrix component and to which osteopromoting properties are attributed, such as the stimulation of cell differentiation in osteoblasts and the stimulation of cicatrization [13,15,16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been proposed that incorporating collagen into the mineralized bone matrix could improve the behavior of the substitute by adding an osteopromoting quality, allowing improvements in the preservation of bone levels after regenerative procedures [15]. Furthermore, it has been reported that adding collagen membranes to grafted bone substitutes decreases the risk of migration and aggregation [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biocompatibility Assessment of Two Commercial Bone Xenografts by In Vitro and In Vivo Methods

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone substitutes based on xenografts have been used for a long time in bone regeneration thanks to their inductive capacity for bone tissue regeneration. Some bone-based scaffolds have been modified by adding collagen and other proteins to improve their regenerative capacity and prevent migration and aggregation, especially particles. However, rejection of this graft has been reported due to protein residues caused by poor material preparation. We compared the in vitro and in vivo biological response of two commercial xenografts (InterOss®, F1 and InterOss® Collagen, F2) and a commercial porcine collagen membrane (InterCollagen® Guide, F3) as a rapid degradation control. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FT-IR) analysis evidenced the presence of hydroxyl, orthophosphate, and carbonate groups of the xenografts and amide groups of collagen. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) of the xenografts demonstrated their thermal stability and the presence of a few amounts of organic material. The study by differential scanning calorimetry showed the presence of endothermic peaks typical of the dehydration of the xenografts (F1 and F2) and for the collagen membrane (F3), the beginning of structural three-dimensional protein changes. Subsequently, in vitro biocompatibility tests were carried out for the materials with Artemia salina and MTT cell viability with HeLa cells, demonstrating the high biocompatibility of the materials. Finally, in vivo biocompatibility was studied by implanting xenografts in biomodels (Wistar rats) at different periods (30, 60, and 90 days). The F1 xenograft (InterOss) remained remarkably stable throughout the experiment (90 days). F2 (InterOss Collagen) presented a separation of its apatite and collagen components at 60 days and advanced resorption at 90 days of implantation. Finally, the collagen membrane (F3) presented faster resorption since, at 90 days, only some tiny fragments of the material were evident. All the in vivo and in vitro test results demonstrated the biocompatibility of the xenografts, demonstrating the potential of these materials for tissue engineering.

show abstract

Histological evaluation of extraction sites grafted with Bio-Oss Collagen: Randomized controlled trial

Cited by 21 publications

References 35 publications

Custom Bone Regeneration (CBR): An Alternative Method of Bone Augmentation—A Case Series Study

Custom Bone Regeneration (CBR): An Alternative Method of Bone Augmentation—A Case Series Study

A Comparative Study of Two Bone Graft Substitutes—InterOss® Collagen and OCS-B Collagen®

Biocompatibility Assessment of Two Commercial Bone Xenografts by In Vitro and In Vivo Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About