Cargando…

Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits

Background: The conformation of the recipient site for an inlay graft presents an increased contact with the parent bone compared to an onlay graft. This might favor bone growth within the inlay compared to onlay grafts. Hence, the objective of this study was to compare the bone incorporation and re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sakaguchi, Ryuichi, Xavier, Samuel Porfirio, Morinaga, Kenzo, Botticelli, Daniele, Silva, Erick Ricardo, Nakajima, Yasushi, Baba, Shunsuke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10608602/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37895725
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16206742
_version_ 1785127819076960256
author Sakaguchi, Ryuichi
Xavier, Samuel Porfirio
Morinaga, Kenzo
Botticelli, Daniele
Silva, Erick Ricardo
Nakajima, Yasushi
Baba, Shunsuke
author_facet Sakaguchi, Ryuichi
Xavier, Samuel Porfirio
Morinaga, Kenzo
Botticelli, Daniele
Silva, Erick Ricardo
Nakajima, Yasushi
Baba, Shunsuke
author_sort Sakaguchi, Ryuichi
collection PubMed
description Background: The conformation of the recipient site for an inlay graft presents an increased contact with the parent bone compared to an onlay graft. This might favor bone growth within the inlay compared to onlay grafts. Hence, the objective of this study was to compare the bone incorporation and remodeling processes of xenogeneic en bloc grafts placed using two bone grafting techniques, i.e., onlay vs. inlay. Methods: In this prospective, randomized, split-mouth study (test and control sides in the same animal), two bone grafting techniques were comparatively evaluated. The lateral aspect of the rabbit mandible was used as the recipient site, bilaterally. On one side of the mandible, the cortical bone was perforated with drills to allow a better bone formation from the bone wound and the marrow spaces. A xenogeneic bone block was fixed in the center of the prepared region, representing the onlay site. On the other side of the mandible, a 7 mm wide and 3 mm deep circumferential defect was prepared using trephines and drills. A xenogeneic bone block was fixed in the center of the defect, representing the inlay site. Two healing periods were applied in the study: 2 and 10 weeks, each represented by 10 rabbits (n = 10 for each period). Results: After 2 weeks of healing, the mean percentage of new bone was 10.4% and 23.3% at the onlay and inlay grafts, respectively (p = 0.022). After 10 weeks of healing, new bone increased to 13.2% at the onlay sites and 25.4% at the inlay sites (p = 0.080). In the 10-week period, the inlay grafts presented a homogeneous growth of new bone in all regions, while in the onlay grafts, low percentages of new bone were observed in the external regions. Conclusion: The percentage of new bone increased faster and was higher in the inlay grafts than in the onlay grafts. This outcome might be related to the self-contained conformation of the recipient site in the inlay group, which offered more sources for new bone formation compared to the one-wall conformation of the recipient sites in the onlay group. The osteoconductive properties of the biomaterial allowed the newly formed bone to reach the most peripheral regions in both groups. The osteoconductive properties of the biomaterial, together with the protection offered by the collagen membrane, allowed marginal closure of the defects by newly formed bone in the inlay group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10608602
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106086022023-10-28 Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits Sakaguchi, Ryuichi Xavier, Samuel Porfirio Morinaga, Kenzo Botticelli, Daniele Silva, Erick Ricardo Nakajima, Yasushi Baba, Shunsuke Materials (Basel) Article Background: The conformation of the recipient site for an inlay graft presents an increased contact with the parent bone compared to an onlay graft. This might favor bone growth within the inlay compared to onlay grafts. Hence, the objective of this study was to compare the bone incorporation and remodeling processes of xenogeneic en bloc grafts placed using two bone grafting techniques, i.e., onlay vs. inlay. Methods: In this prospective, randomized, split-mouth study (test and control sides in the same animal), two bone grafting techniques were comparatively evaluated. The lateral aspect of the rabbit mandible was used as the recipient site, bilaterally. On one side of the mandible, the cortical bone was perforated with drills to allow a better bone formation from the bone wound and the marrow spaces. A xenogeneic bone block was fixed in the center of the prepared region, representing the onlay site. On the other side of the mandible, a 7 mm wide and 3 mm deep circumferential defect was prepared using trephines and drills. A xenogeneic bone block was fixed in the center of the defect, representing the inlay site. Two healing periods were applied in the study: 2 and 10 weeks, each represented by 10 rabbits (n = 10 for each period). Results: After 2 weeks of healing, the mean percentage of new bone was 10.4% and 23.3% at the onlay and inlay grafts, respectively (p = 0.022). After 10 weeks of healing, new bone increased to 13.2% at the onlay sites and 25.4% at the inlay sites (p = 0.080). In the 10-week period, the inlay grafts presented a homogeneous growth of new bone in all regions, while in the onlay grafts, low percentages of new bone were observed in the external regions. Conclusion: The percentage of new bone increased faster and was higher in the inlay grafts than in the onlay grafts. This outcome might be related to the self-contained conformation of the recipient site in the inlay group, which offered more sources for new bone formation compared to the one-wall conformation of the recipient sites in the onlay group. The osteoconductive properties of the biomaterial allowed the newly formed bone to reach the most peripheral regions in both groups. The osteoconductive properties of the biomaterial, together with the protection offered by the collagen membrane, allowed marginal closure of the defects by newly formed bone in the inlay group. MDPI 2023-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC10608602/ /pubmed/37895725 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16206742 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Sakaguchi, Ryuichi
Xavier, Samuel Porfirio
Morinaga, Kenzo
Botticelli, Daniele
Silva, Erick Ricardo
Nakajima, Yasushi
Baba, Shunsuke
Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits
title Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits
title_full Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits
title_fullStr Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits
title_full_unstemmed Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits
title_short Histological Comparison of Collagenated Cancellous Equine Bone Blocks Used as Inlay or Onlay for Lateral Bone Augmentation in Rabbits
title_sort histological comparison of collagenated cancellous equine bone blocks used as inlay or onlay for lateral bone augmentation in rabbits
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10608602/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37895725
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16206742
work_keys_str_mv AT sakaguchiryuichi histologicalcomparisonofcollagenatedcancellousequineboneblocksusedasinlayoronlayforlateralboneaugmentationinrabbits
AT xaviersamuelporfirio histologicalcomparisonofcollagenatedcancellousequineboneblocksusedasinlayoronlayforlateralboneaugmentationinrabbits
AT morinagakenzo histologicalcomparisonofcollagenatedcancellousequineboneblocksusedasinlayoronlayforlateralboneaugmentationinrabbits
AT botticellidaniele histologicalcomparisonofcollagenatedcancellousequineboneblocksusedasinlayoronlayforlateralboneaugmentationinrabbits
AT silvaerickricardo histologicalcomparisonofcollagenatedcancellousequineboneblocksusedasinlayoronlayforlateralboneaugmentationinrabbits
AT nakajimayasushi histologicalcomparisonofcollagenatedcancellousequineboneblocksusedasinlayoronlayforlateralboneaugmentationinrabbits
AT babashunsuke histologicalcomparisonofcollagenatedcancellousequineboneblocksusedasinlayoronlayforlateralboneaugmentationinrabbits