Cargando…

Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies

After tooth extraction, the alveolar ridge undergoes dimensional changes. Different bone regeneration biomaterials are used to reduce bone loss. The aim of this article was to systematically review the literature on the effect of injectable synthetic biomaterials and their advantages and disadvantag...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tomas, Matej, Čandrlić, Marija, Juzbašić, Martina, Ivanišević, Zrinka, Matijević, Nikola, Včev, Aleksandar, Cvijanović Peloza, Olga, Matijević, Marko, Perić Kačarević, Željka
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8197881/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34073551
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14112858
_version_ 1783707008029949952
author Tomas, Matej
Čandrlić, Marija
Juzbašić, Martina
Ivanišević, Zrinka
Matijević, Nikola
Včev, Aleksandar
Cvijanović Peloza, Olga
Matijević, Marko
Perić Kačarević, Željka
author_facet Tomas, Matej
Čandrlić, Marija
Juzbašić, Martina
Ivanišević, Zrinka
Matijević, Nikola
Včev, Aleksandar
Cvijanović Peloza, Olga
Matijević, Marko
Perić Kačarević, Željka
author_sort Tomas, Matej
collection PubMed
description After tooth extraction, the alveolar ridge undergoes dimensional changes. Different bone regeneration biomaterials are used to reduce bone loss. The aim of this article was to systematically review the literature on the effect of injectable synthetic biomaterials and their advantages and disadvantages for new bone formation in the maxilla and mandible in animals and humans. A literature search was conducted in November 2020 via MEDLINE PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. Of the 501 records screened, abstract analysis was performed on 49 articles, resulting in 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Animal studies have shown heterogeneity in terms of animal models, follow-up time, composition of the injectable biomaterial, and different outcome variables such as bone–implant contact, newly formed bone, and peri-implant bone density. Heterogeneity has also been demonstrated by human studies. The following outcomes were observed: newly formed bone, connective tissue, residual injectable bone graft substitute, radiographic density, residual bone height, and different follow-up periods. Further studies, especially in humans, based on the histological and biomechanical properties of the injectable delivery form, are needed to draw more concrete conclusions that will contribute to a better understanding of the benefits of this type of biomaterials and their role in bone regeneration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8197881
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81978812021-06-14 Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies Tomas, Matej Čandrlić, Marija Juzbašić, Martina Ivanišević, Zrinka Matijević, Nikola Včev, Aleksandar Cvijanović Peloza, Olga Matijević, Marko Perić Kačarević, Željka Materials (Basel) Review After tooth extraction, the alveolar ridge undergoes dimensional changes. Different bone regeneration biomaterials are used to reduce bone loss. The aim of this article was to systematically review the literature on the effect of injectable synthetic biomaterials and their advantages and disadvantages for new bone formation in the maxilla and mandible in animals and humans. A literature search was conducted in November 2020 via MEDLINE PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. Of the 501 records screened, abstract analysis was performed on 49 articles, resulting in 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Animal studies have shown heterogeneity in terms of animal models, follow-up time, composition of the injectable biomaterial, and different outcome variables such as bone–implant contact, newly formed bone, and peri-implant bone density. Heterogeneity has also been demonstrated by human studies. The following outcomes were observed: newly formed bone, connective tissue, residual injectable bone graft substitute, radiographic density, residual bone height, and different follow-up periods. Further studies, especially in humans, based on the histological and biomechanical properties of the injectable delivery form, are needed to draw more concrete conclusions that will contribute to a better understanding of the benefits of this type of biomaterials and their role in bone regeneration. MDPI 2021-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8197881/ /pubmed/34073551 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14112858 Text en © 2021 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 Review
Tomas, Matej
Čandrlić, Marija
Juzbašić, Martina
Ivanišević, Zrinka
Matijević, Nikola
Včev, Aleksandar
Cvijanović Peloza, Olga
Matijević, Marko
Perić Kačarević, Željka
Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies
title Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies
title_full Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies
title_fullStr Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies
title_full_unstemmed Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies
title_short Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies
title_sort synthetic injectable biomaterials for alveolar bone regeneration in animal and human studies
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8197881/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34073551
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14112858
work_keys_str_mv AT tomasmatej syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT candrlicmarija syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT juzbasicmartina syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT ivaniseviczrinka syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT matijevicnikola syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT vcevaleksandar syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT cvijanovicpelozaolga syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT matijevicmarko syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies
AT perickacareviczeljka syntheticinjectablebiomaterialsforalveolarboneregenerationinanimalandhumanstudies