Physicochemical Characterization of Five Different Bone Graft Substitutes Used in Periodontal Regeneration: An
Alloplasts
bone graft substitutes
characterization
physicochemical
xenografts
Journal
Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
ISSN: 2231-0762
Titre abrégé: J Int Soc Prev Community Dent
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101618802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
15
05
2020
revised:
10
07
2020
accepted:
12
07
2020
entrez:
7
12
2020
pubmed:
8
12
2020
medline:
8
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Periodontal regeneration involves using a variety of bone graft substitutes (BGS) of varying origin and manufacturing processes. These include a wide range of biomaterials that are mainly of two types: the xenografts and alloplasts. The efficacy of these BGS depends upon the physical characteristics such as particle size, porous nature, surface morphology, as well as the chemical characteristics like composition, crystallinity and resorption properties. The present study is a descriptive study that focuses on describing the physicochemical characteristics of five selected commercially available BGS that are frequently used in periodontal regeneration procedures. The BGS studied here included two xenografts (colocast and osseograft) and three alloplasts (B-OstIN, biograft HABG active and biograft HT). The physical properties of the BGS, including particle size, morphology, and surface topography, were analyzed using SEM. The mineral phases and crystallinity of the BGS were analyzed using XRD. The results showed that the xenografts (colocast and osseograft) had minimal mineral composition and crystalline structure. The physical properties such as surface roughness and porosity were less compared to alloplastic materials. The alloplasts (B-OstIN, biograft HABG and biograft HT) that had different chemical compositions showed varying physical and crystalline properties. Biograft HT showed a superior porous scaffold architecture among all BGS studied. It is important for a clinician to have a thorough understanding about the physicochemical characteristics of BGS they use in periodontal regeneration. The xenografts evaluated here had minimal physical and crystalline properties. Among the alloplasts studied, biograft HT showed superior physicochemical properties, while the presence of bioactive glass in biograft HABG enhanced regeneration.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Periodontal regeneration involves using a variety of bone graft substitutes (BGS) of varying origin and manufacturing processes. These include a wide range of biomaterials that are mainly of two types: the xenografts and alloplasts. The efficacy of these BGS depends upon the physical characteristics such as particle size, porous nature, surface morphology, as well as the chemical characteristics like composition, crystallinity and resorption properties.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
The present study is a descriptive study that focuses on describing the physicochemical characteristics of five selected commercially available BGS that are frequently used in periodontal regeneration procedures. The BGS studied here included two xenografts (colocast and osseograft) and three alloplasts (B-OstIN, biograft HABG active and biograft HT).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
The physical properties of the BGS, including particle size, morphology, and surface topography, were analyzed using SEM. The mineral phases and crystallinity of the BGS were analyzed using XRD.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The results showed that the xenografts (colocast and osseograft) had minimal mineral composition and crystalline structure. The physical properties such as surface roughness and porosity were less compared to alloplastic materials. The alloplasts (B-OstIN, biograft HABG and biograft HT) that had different chemical compositions showed varying physical and crystalline properties. Biograft HT showed a superior porous scaffold architecture among all BGS studied.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
It is important for a clinician to have a thorough understanding about the physicochemical characteristics of BGS they use in periodontal regeneration. The xenografts evaluated here had minimal physical and crystalline properties. Among the alloplasts studied, biograft HT showed superior physicochemical properties, while the presence of bioactive glass in biograft HABG enhanced regeneration.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33282774
doi: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_263_20
pii: JISPCD-10-634
pmc: PMC7685282
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
634-642Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2020 Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest in the study.
Références
Materials (Basel). 2018 Jan 30;11(2):
pubmed: 29385747
Biomaterials. 2008 Aug;29(23):3306-16
pubmed: 18485476
Materials (Basel). 2017 Jun 07;10(6):
pubmed: 28772984
J Endod. 2009 Mar;35(3):321-8
pubmed: 19249588
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2010 Feb;92(2):409-19
pubmed: 19904820
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007 Apr;27(2):151-9
pubmed: 17514887
Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:320790
pubmed: 25143936
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001 Jan-Feb;16(1):105-14
pubmed: 11280355
Adv Healthc Mater. 2013 Jan;2(1):186-94
pubmed: 23184876
Acta Biomater. 2013 Sep;9(9):8037-45
pubmed: 23791671
J Funct Biomater. 2019 Jan 02;10(1):
pubmed: 30609698
J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Jan;8(1):309-15
pubmed: 24596804
Tissue Eng Part A. 2011 Apr;17(7-8):1083-97
pubmed: 21091326
Biomatter. 2012 Oct-Dec;2(4):271-7
pubmed: 23507891
Biomaterials. 2007 Jan;28(1):45-54
pubmed: 16963118
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016 Jun;44(6):708-14
pubmed: 27107475
Connect Tissue Res. 2002;43(2-3):529-34
pubmed: 12489210
Periodontol 2000. 2012 Jun;59(1):185-202
pubmed: 22507066
Biomaterials. 2012 Jul;33(21):5230-46
pubmed: 22521491