Mineralized collagen artificial bone repair material products used for fusing the podarthral joints with internal fixation—a case report

Ghate, Nihar; Cui, Helen

doi:10.1093/rb/rbx015

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ghate et al. [ 78 ] employed Bongold™ for the first time and it had a critical influence on podarthral joint defect repair ( Fig. 8 ).…”

Section: Commercially Available Bioabsorbable Bone Substitute Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biologically modified implantation as therapeutic bioabsorbable materials for bone defect repair

et al. 2022

Regenerative Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For decades, researches have concentrated on the mechanical properties, biodegradation, and biocompatibility of implants used in the therapy of large size bone defect. In vivo studies demonstrate that bioabsorbable bone substitute materials can reduce the risk of common symptoms such as inflammation and osteonecrosis caused by bio-inert materials after long-term implantation. Several organic, inorganic, and composite materials have been approved for clinical application, based on their unique characteristics and advantages. Although some artificial bioabsorbable bone substitute materials have been used for years, there are still some disadvantages existing, such as low mechanical strength, high brittleness, and low degradation rate. Therefore, novel bioabsorbable composite materials biomaterials have been developed for bone defect repair. In this review, we provide an overview of the development of artificial bioabsorbable bone substitute materials and highlight the advantages and disadvantages. Furthermore, recent advances in bioabsorbable bone substitute materials used in bone defect repair are outlined. Finally, we discuss current challenges and further developments in the clinical application of bioabsorbable bone substitute materials.

show abstract

“…Ghate et al. [ 78 ] employed Bongold™ for the first time and it had a critical influence on podarthral joint defect repair ( Fig. 8 ).…”

Section: Commercially Available Bioabsorbable Bone Substitute Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biologically modified implantation as therapeutic bioabsorbable materials for bone defect repair

et al. 2022

Regenerative Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many in vitro animal studies also have been verified the biocompatibility, biodegradability and osteoconductive potency of MC [ 38 , 39 ]. For example, Ghate et al demonstrated that MC applied for the patient with collapse and subluxation of metatarsal-cuneiform joint acted as an excellent alternative to autograft in fusing the podarthral joints with internal fixation [ 40 ]. Liu et al also investigated the effect of MC on the rabbit rib defect, and reported that the MC group showed a higher bone remodeling activity in comparison with blank control group [ 41 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical efficacy of mineralized collagen (MC) versus anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss) for immediate implant placement in esthetic area: a single-center retrospective study

Dai

Han

et al. 2021

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of mineralized collagen (MC) versus anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss) for immediate implant placement in esthetic area. Methods Medical records of Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of Shandong Provincial Hospital were screened for patients who had been treated with immediate implant implantation in the esthetic area using either MC (Allgens®, Beijing Allgens Medical Science and Technology Co., Ltd., China) or Bio-Oss (Bio-Oss®, Geistlich Biomaterials, Wolhusen, Switzerland), between January 2018 and December 2019. All patients fulfilling the in-/exclusion criteria and following followed for a minimum period of 1 year after surgery were enrolled into the presented study. Implant survival rate, radiographic, esthetic and patient satisfactory evaluations were performed. Results Altogether, 70 patients were included in the study; a total of 80 implants were inserted. All implants had good initial stability. The survival rate of implants was 100% at 1-year follow-up. The differences in horizontal and vertical bone loss between the MC group (0.72 ± 0.26 mm, 1.62 ± 0.84 mm) and the Bio-Oss group (0.70 ± 0.52 mm, 1.57 ± 0.88 mm) were no significant difference statistically no significant 6 months after permanent restoration. Similar results occurred at 12 months after permanent restoration functional loaded. Clinical acceptability defined by pink esthetic score (PES) ≥ 6 (6.07 ± 1.62 vs. 6.13 ± 1.41) was not significantly different between groups. Patient satisfaction estimated by visual analog scale (VAS) was similar (8.56 ± 1.12 vs. 8.27 ± 1.44), and the difference was no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusions The biomimetic MC showed a similar behaviour as Bio-Oss not only in its dimensional tissues changes but also in clinical acceptability and patient satisfaction. Within the limitations of this study, these cases show that MC could be considered as an alternative bone graft in IIP

show abstract

“…Peng et al observed the effect of MC for the treatment of senile proximal humeral osteoporotic fractures, proving that it can accelerate healing of senile proximal humeral fracture, improve the therapeutic effect and reduce the complications 30 . Ghate et al demonstrated that MC applied for the patient with collapse and subluxation of metatarsal-cuneiform joint acted as an excellent alternative to autograft in fusing the podarthral joints with internal xation 34 . Liu et al also investigated the effect of MC on the rabbit rib defect, and reported that the MC group showed a higher bone remodeling activity in comparison with blank control group 35 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical efficacy of Mineralized Collagen (MC) versus Bio-Oss for immediate implant implantation in esthetic area: a single-center retrospective clinical study

Dai

Han

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of mineralized collagen (MC) versus Bio-Oss for immediate implant implantation in esthetic area. Methods: Medical records of Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of Shandong Provincial Hospital were screened for patients who had been treated with immediate implant implantation in the esthetic area using either MC( Allgens®) or Bio-Oss®, between January 2018 and December 2019. All patients fulfilling the in-/exclusion criteria and following for a minimum period of 1 year after surgery were enrolled into the presented study. Implant survival rate, radiographic, esthetic and patient satisfactory evaluations were performed.Results: Altogether, 70 patients were included in the study; a total of 80 implants were inserted. All implants had good initial stability after implantation. The survival rate of implants was 100% at 1-year follow-up. The differences in horizontal and vertical bone loss between the Trail group (0.72±0.26mm, 1.62±0.84mm) and the Control group (0.70±0.52 mm, 1.57±0.88mm) were statistically no significant at 6 months after permanent restoration. Similar results occurred at 12 months after permanent restoration. Clinical acceptability defined by PES ≥ 6 (6.07±1.62 vs. 6.13±1.41) was not significantly different between groups. Patient satisfaction estimated by VAS was similar (8.56±1.12 vs. 8.27±1.44), and the difference was not statistically significant between the two groups.Conclusions: The biomimetic MC seems to be a suitable and feasible option for bone graft material in immediate implant implantation.

show abstract

Mineralized collagen artificial bone repair material products used for fusing the podarthral joints with internal fixation—a case report

Cited by 10 publications

References 16 publications

Biologically modified implantation as therapeutic bioabsorbable materials for bone defect repair

Biologically modified implantation as therapeutic bioabsorbable materials for bone defect repair

Clinical efficacy of mineralized collagen (MC) versus anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss) for immediate implant placement in esthetic area: a single-center retrospective study

Clinical efficacy of Mineralized Collagen (MC) versus Bio-Oss for immediate implant implantation in esthetic area: a single-center retrospective clinical study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About