Cargando…

Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration

BACKGROUND: Silk cocoon is composed of multiple layers. The natural silk cocoon containing all layers was cut as a rectangular shape as defined as total group. The inner and outermost layers were removed from the total group and the remained mat was defined as the middle group. The objectives of thi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Seong-Gon, Kim, Min-Keun, Kweon, HaeYong, Jo, You-Young, Lee, Kwang-Gill, Lee, Jeong Keun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4770059/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27069911
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40902-016-0057-1
_version_ 1782418189089505280
author Kim, Seong-Gon
Kim, Min-Keun
Kweon, HaeYong
Jo, You-Young
Lee, Kwang-Gill
Lee, Jeong Keun
author_facet Kim, Seong-Gon
Kim, Min-Keun
Kweon, HaeYong
Jo, You-Young
Lee, Kwang-Gill
Lee, Jeong Keun
author_sort Kim, Seong-Gon
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Silk cocoon is composed of multiple layers. The natural silk cocoon containing all layers was cut as a rectangular shape as defined as total group. The inner and outermost layers were removed from the total group and the remained mat was defined as the middle group. The objectives of this study was to compare the total group with the middle group as a barrier membrane for the guided bone regeneration. METHODS: The effects of these materials on the cellular proliferation and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) expression of MG63 cells were explored. For comparing bone regeneration ability, bilateral bone defects were created in calvarial areas in ten adult New Zealand white rabbits. The defects were covered with silk membranes of the middle group, with silk membrane of the total group used as the control on the contralateral side. The defects were allowed to heal for 4 and 8 weeks. Micro-computerized tomography (μCT) and histological examination were performed. RESULTS: The middle group exhibited a higher MTT value 48 and 72 h after treatment compared to the total group. ALP expression was also higher in the middle group. The results of μCT and histologic examination showed that new bone formation was significantly higher in the middle group compared to the total group 8 weeks postoperatively (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the middle layer of the silk cocoon supports guided bone regeneration better than unprocessed silk cocoon.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4770059
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47700592016-04-09 Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration Kim, Seong-Gon Kim, Min-Keun Kweon, HaeYong Jo, You-Young Lee, Kwang-Gill Lee, Jeong Keun Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg Research BACKGROUND: Silk cocoon is composed of multiple layers. The natural silk cocoon containing all layers was cut as a rectangular shape as defined as total group. The inner and outermost layers were removed from the total group and the remained mat was defined as the middle group. The objectives of this study was to compare the total group with the middle group as a barrier membrane for the guided bone regeneration. METHODS: The effects of these materials on the cellular proliferation and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) expression of MG63 cells were explored. For comparing bone regeneration ability, bilateral bone defects were created in calvarial areas in ten adult New Zealand white rabbits. The defects were covered with silk membranes of the middle group, with silk membrane of the total group used as the control on the contralateral side. The defects were allowed to heal for 4 and 8 weeks. Micro-computerized tomography (μCT) and histological examination were performed. RESULTS: The middle group exhibited a higher MTT value 48 and 72 h after treatment compared to the total group. ALP expression was also higher in the middle group. The results of μCT and histologic examination showed that new bone formation was significantly higher in the middle group compared to the total group 8 weeks postoperatively (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the middle layer of the silk cocoon supports guided bone regeneration better than unprocessed silk cocoon. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-02-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4770059/ /pubmed/27069911 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40902-016-0057-1 Text en © Kim et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Kim, Seong-Gon
Kim, Min-Keun
Kweon, HaeYong
Jo, You-Young
Lee, Kwang-Gill
Lee, Jeong Keun
Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration
title Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration
title_full Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration
title_fullStr Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration
title_short Comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration
title_sort comparison of unprocessed silk cocoon and silk cocoon middle layer membranes for guided bone regeneration
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4770059/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27069911
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40902-016-0057-1
work_keys_str_mv AT kimseonggon comparisonofunprocessedsilkcocoonandsilkcocoonmiddlelayermembranesforguidedboneregeneration
AT kimminkeun comparisonofunprocessedsilkcocoonandsilkcocoonmiddlelayermembranesforguidedboneregeneration
AT kweonhaeyong comparisonofunprocessedsilkcocoonandsilkcocoonmiddlelayermembranesforguidedboneregeneration
AT joyouyoung comparisonofunprocessedsilkcocoonandsilkcocoonmiddlelayermembranesforguidedboneregeneration
AT leekwanggill comparisonofunprocessedsilkcocoonandsilkcocoonmiddlelayermembranesforguidedboneregeneration
AT leejeongkeun comparisonofunprocessedsilkcocoonandsilkcocoonmiddlelayermembranesforguidedboneregeneration