Cargando…

Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits

Background: The volumetric and biological behaviors of equine block grafts compared with autogenous block grafts have not yet been assessed. Hence, the aim of the present study was to compare—by means of histomorphometry, immunohistochemistry and microtomography—the graft incorporation and remodelin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silva, Erick Ricardo, Balan, Vitor Ferreira, Botticelli, Daniele, Soldini, Claudio, Okamoto, Roberta, Xavier, Samuel Porfirio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8540416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34683641
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14206049
_version_ 1784588981807087616
author Silva, Erick Ricardo
Balan, Vitor Ferreira
Botticelli, Daniele
Soldini, Claudio
Okamoto, Roberta
Xavier, Samuel Porfirio
author_facet Silva, Erick Ricardo
Balan, Vitor Ferreira
Botticelli, Daniele
Soldini, Claudio
Okamoto, Roberta
Xavier, Samuel Porfirio
author_sort Silva, Erick Ricardo
collection PubMed
description Background: The volumetric and biological behaviors of equine block grafts compared with autogenous block grafts have not yet been assessed. Hence, the aim of the present study was to compare—by means of histomorphometry, immunohistochemistry and microtomography—the graft incorporation and remodeling processes of autogenous and equine xenogenous bone blocks used for mandibular lateral augmentation in rabbits. Methods: Autogenous bone grafts harvested from the iliac bony crest and equine block grafts were secured to the lateral aspect of the mandible angle of eighteen rabbits. The healing after 7, 20 and 60 days was assessed in six animals each period. Results: After 60 days, new bone was present 24.2 ± 11.2% and 31.6 ± 13.3% in the autograft and xenograft groups, respectively. A better integration to the recipient sites was observed in the autogenous compared with the xenogenous blocks. Conclusions: Both xenogenous and autogenous bone blocks presented similar percentages of newly formed bone over time. However, bone volume, the quality of the grafted area and graft incorporation to the recipient sites were superior in the autogenous compared with the equine xenogenous graft sites.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8540416
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85404162021-10-24 Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits Silva, Erick Ricardo Balan, Vitor Ferreira Botticelli, Daniele Soldini, Claudio Okamoto, Roberta Xavier, Samuel Porfirio Materials (Basel) Article Background: The volumetric and biological behaviors of equine block grafts compared with autogenous block grafts have not yet been assessed. Hence, the aim of the present study was to compare—by means of histomorphometry, immunohistochemistry and microtomography—the graft incorporation and remodeling processes of autogenous and equine xenogenous bone blocks used for mandibular lateral augmentation in rabbits. Methods: Autogenous bone grafts harvested from the iliac bony crest and equine block grafts were secured to the lateral aspect of the mandible angle of eighteen rabbits. The healing after 7, 20 and 60 days was assessed in six animals each period. Results: After 60 days, new bone was present 24.2 ± 11.2% and 31.6 ± 13.3% in the autograft and xenograft groups, respectively. A better integration to the recipient sites was observed in the autogenous compared with the xenogenous blocks. Conclusions: Both xenogenous and autogenous bone blocks presented similar percentages of newly formed bone over time. However, bone volume, the quality of the grafted area and graft incorporation to the recipient sites were superior in the autogenous compared with the equine xenogenous graft sites. MDPI 2021-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8540416/ /pubmed/34683641 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14206049 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 Article
Silva, Erick Ricardo
Balan, Vitor Ferreira
Botticelli, Daniele
Soldini, Claudio
Okamoto, Roberta
Xavier, Samuel Porfirio
Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits
title Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits
title_full Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits
title_fullStr Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits
title_full_unstemmed Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits
title_short Histomorphometric, Immunohistochemical and Microtomographic Comparison between Autogenous and Xenogenous Bone Blocks for Mandibular Lateral Augmentation in Rabbits
title_sort histomorphometric, immunohistochemical and microtomographic comparison between autogenous and xenogenous bone blocks for mandibular lateral augmentation in rabbits
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8540416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34683641
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14206049
work_keys_str_mv AT silvaerickricardo histomorphometricimmunohistochemicalandmicrotomographiccomparisonbetweenautogenousandxenogenousboneblocksformandibularlateralaugmentationinrabbits
AT balanvitorferreira histomorphometricimmunohistochemicalandmicrotomographiccomparisonbetweenautogenousandxenogenousboneblocksformandibularlateralaugmentationinrabbits
AT botticellidaniele histomorphometricimmunohistochemicalandmicrotomographiccomparisonbetweenautogenousandxenogenousboneblocksformandibularlateralaugmentationinrabbits
AT soldiniclaudio histomorphometricimmunohistochemicalandmicrotomographiccomparisonbetweenautogenousandxenogenousboneblocksformandibularlateralaugmentationinrabbits
AT okamotoroberta histomorphometricimmunohistochemicalandmicrotomographiccomparisonbetweenautogenousandxenogenousboneblocksformandibularlateralaugmentationinrabbits
AT xaviersamuelporfirio histomorphometricimmunohistochemicalandmicrotomographiccomparisonbetweenautogenousandxenogenousboneblocksformandibularlateralaugmentationinrabbits