Cargando…

Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the osseointegration of implants placed in rat tibia sites grafted with Deproteinized Bovine Bone (DBB) and Native Bone (NB). Twenty-eight rats were divided into two groups according to the type of substrate in which the implants were to be placed: NB – implants...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Quiroz, Victor F, Lima, Júlia R, Pinotti, Felipe E, Marcantonio, Rosemary AC, Marcantonio, Elcio, Oliveira, Guilherme JPL
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedad Argentina de Investigación Odontológica 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10283429/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35700535
http://dx.doi.org/10.54589/aol.35/1/3
_version_ 1785061308527280128
author Quiroz, Victor F
Lima, Júlia R
Pinotti, Felipe E
Marcantonio, Rosemary AC
Marcantonio, Elcio
Oliveira, Guilherme JPL
author_facet Quiroz, Victor F
Lima, Júlia R
Pinotti, Felipe E
Marcantonio, Rosemary AC
Marcantonio, Elcio
Oliveira, Guilherme JPL
author_sort Quiroz, Victor F
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to evaluate the osseointegration of implants placed in rat tibia sites grafted with Deproteinized Bovine Bone (DBB) and Native Bone (NB). Twenty-eight rats were divided into two groups according to the type of substrate in which the implants were to be placed: NB – implants placed in native bone; DBB – implants placed in areas grafted with DBB. In the DBB group, the bone defect was made and filled with the bone substitute 60 days before placing the implant. The animals were euthanized 15 or 45 days after implant placement. Osseointegration was assessed by the removal torque, volume of mineralized tissues around the implants (BV/TV), bone-implant contact (%BIC), and bone between threads (%BBT). The implants placed in NB presented higher removal torque (8.00 ± 1.26 Ncm vs. 2.33 ± 0.41 Ncm at 15 days and 22.00 ± 2.44 Ncm vs. 4.00 ± 1.41 Ncm at 45 days), higher %BV/TV (47.92 ± 1.54% vs. 33.33 ± 4.77% at 15 days and 70.06 ± 0.91% vs. 39.89 ± 5.90% at 45 days), higher %BIC (39.68 ± 5.02% vs. 9.12 ± 5.56% at 15 days and 83.23 ± 4.42% vs. 18.81 ± 7.21% at 45 days), and higher %BBT (34.33 ± 5.42% vs. 13.24 ± 8.72% at 15 days and 82.33 ± 3.13% vs. 22.26 ± 8.27% at 45 days) than the implants placed in DBB grafted areas. The degree of osseointegration was lower in implants placed in the area grafted with DBB than in NB in rat tibias.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10283429
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Sociedad Argentina de Investigación Odontológica
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102834292023-06-21 Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study Quiroz, Victor F Lima, Júlia R Pinotti, Felipe E Marcantonio, Rosemary AC Marcantonio, Elcio Oliveira, Guilherme JPL Acta Odontol Latinoam Original Article The aim of this study was to evaluate the osseointegration of implants placed in rat tibia sites grafted with Deproteinized Bovine Bone (DBB) and Native Bone (NB). Twenty-eight rats were divided into two groups according to the type of substrate in which the implants were to be placed: NB – implants placed in native bone; DBB – implants placed in areas grafted with DBB. In the DBB group, the bone defect was made and filled with the bone substitute 60 days before placing the implant. The animals were euthanized 15 or 45 days after implant placement. Osseointegration was assessed by the removal torque, volume of mineralized tissues around the implants (BV/TV), bone-implant contact (%BIC), and bone between threads (%BBT). The implants placed in NB presented higher removal torque (8.00 ± 1.26 Ncm vs. 2.33 ± 0.41 Ncm at 15 days and 22.00 ± 2.44 Ncm vs. 4.00 ± 1.41 Ncm at 45 days), higher %BV/TV (47.92 ± 1.54% vs. 33.33 ± 4.77% at 15 days and 70.06 ± 0.91% vs. 39.89 ± 5.90% at 45 days), higher %BIC (39.68 ± 5.02% vs. 9.12 ± 5.56% at 15 days and 83.23 ± 4.42% vs. 18.81 ± 7.21% at 45 days), and higher %BBT (34.33 ± 5.42% vs. 13.24 ± 8.72% at 15 days and 82.33 ± 3.13% vs. 22.26 ± 8.27% at 45 days) than the implants placed in DBB grafted areas. The degree of osseointegration was lower in implants placed in the area grafted with DBB than in NB in rat tibias. Sociedad Argentina de Investigación Odontológica 2022-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10283429/ /pubmed/35700535 http://dx.doi.org/10.54589/aol.35/1/3 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
spellingShingle Original Article
Quiroz, Victor F
Lima, Júlia R
Pinotti, Felipe E
Marcantonio, Rosemary AC
Marcantonio, Elcio
Oliveira, Guilherme JPL
Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study
title Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study
title_full Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study
title_fullStr Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study
title_short Comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. A preclinical study
title_sort comparison of osseointegration in areas grafted with deproteinized bovine bone and native bone. a preclinical study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10283429/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35700535
http://dx.doi.org/10.54589/aol.35/1/3
work_keys_str_mv AT quirozvictorf comparisonofosseointegrationinareasgraftedwithdeproteinizedbovineboneandnativeboneapreclinicalstudy
AT limajuliar comparisonofosseointegrationinareasgraftedwithdeproteinizedbovineboneandnativeboneapreclinicalstudy
AT pinottifelipee comparisonofosseointegrationinareasgraftedwithdeproteinizedbovineboneandnativeboneapreclinicalstudy
AT marcantoniorosemaryac comparisonofosseointegrationinareasgraftedwithdeproteinizedbovineboneandnativeboneapreclinicalstudy
AT marcantonioelcio comparisonofosseointegrationinareasgraftedwithdeproteinizedbovineboneandnativeboneapreclinicalstudy
AT oliveiraguilhermejpl comparisonofosseointegrationinareasgraftedwithdeproteinizedbovineboneandnativeboneapreclinicalstudy