Tooth eruption through autogenous and xenogenous bone transplants: a histological and radiographic evaluation in beagle dogs

Abstract

S U M M A R Y . The effect of implanting autogenous and xenogenous (Bio-Oss) bone transplants into metabolically active sites within beagle dog mandibles during permanent premolar tooth eruption was examined. Ten 14-weekold beagles were used. Before commencing the radiographic experiments, metal bone markers were placed in the caudal margin of the mandible at the age of 10 weeks. The deciduous first and third molar teeth were extracted and their sockets over the permanent second and fourth premolars were implanted with autogenous particulate enchondral iliac crest bone, autogenous particulate membraneous mandibular body bone, xenogenous bovine anorganic bone mineral spongiosa granules (1 -2 mm3) (Bio-Oss, Geistlich Pharma, Switzerland) or left empty. The third premolar served as a control site. Standardized oblique lateral radiographs were taken once a week. A number of coordinates of defined points and structures were determined by means of a coordinate digitizing system. Animals were killed 4, 10 and 16 weeks after bone transplantation for histological examination of the transplan tation sites. All premolars showed no delay in eruption or disruption of crown and root development. On histology, the Bio-Oss particles were not resorbed or integrated in the alveolar bone but were pushed forward into the gingiva. We have demonstrated that there is no difference in the eruption curve of the permanent premolars in the four groups (ANOVA ^> 0 .5 ) and that bone transplantation has no inhibitory effect on eruption (ÀNO VÀ P > 0 .3 ) and crown development of the underlying permanent premolar but that Bio-Oss does not have the same resorbable or integrating capability as autogenous bone grafts.

Biodegradation of porous calcium phosphate scaffolds in an ectopic bone formation model studied by X-ray computed microtomograph

“…The obtained results in addition to confirming the wellknown non-biodegradability of HA demonstrated that the observed and quantified general biodegradation behavior of Skelite TM and Bio-Oss® is in agreement with that reported in (Komlev et al, 2006;Merkx et al, 1997;Merkx et al, 1999;Rumpel et al, 2006). Nevertheless, the promising and effective 3D microCT registration procedure employed in the present work, together with the adoption of a large number of implantation times, introduces an appreciable increase in the existing information with regard to biodegradation of bone mimetic scaffolds and of Si-TCP based scaffolds in particular.…”

“…This result correlates with the common knowledge based on literature data that HA is a non-biodegradable material. Moreover, the observed and quantified general biodegradation behavior of Skelite TM and Bio-Oss® according to the present work were in agreement with previously reported data (Komlev et al, 2006;Merkx et al, 1997;Merkx et al, 1999;Rumpel et al, 2006).…”

“…Duda and Pajak (2004), amongst others, have observed BioOss® remnants in patients even several years after Komlev et al Biodegradation of porous calcium phosphate scaffolds implantation. Implantations performed in dog cranial bones (Merkx et al, 1997) could not demonstrate significant biodegradation after several months, although the biomaterial could be resorbed by osteoclast-like cells (Merkx et al, 1999). Indeed, a recent human study (Zaffe et al, 2005) reports biodegradation of these biomaterials by osteoclasts.…”

Bone regeneration with bovine bone impairs orthodontic tooth movement despite proper osseous wound healing in a novel mouse model

“…Da Silva et al., showed in a dog model that regeneration with BB and then OTM led to augmented osseous tissue . Merkx et al., in a dog model provided similar results as the current study, showing translocation of BB particles due to tooth movement . Yang et al., showed similar results in a rat femur defect model and provided evidence that BB are not resorbed despite significantly increased numbers of OCS and elevated expression of RANKL, specifically around the particle surface .…”

A comparison of autogenous bone graft combined with deproteinized bovine bone and autogenous bone graft alone for treatment of alveolar cleft

“…Several studies 14,19,20,25 demonstrated that allogenic and xenogenic bone grafts, including DBB, had no inhibitory effect on tooth eruption or orthodontic tooth movement in vivo. A case report demonstrated the successful tooth movement, by orthodontic force, through the alveolar cleft region 6 months after grafting with a mix of decalcified freeze-dried bone allograft and a granular bioactive glass graft material in the ratio 1:1 30 .…”