TY - JOUR
T1 - Analyses of Bone Regeneration Capacity of Freeze-Dried Bovine Bone and Combined Deproteinized-Demineralized Bovine Bone Particles in Mandibular Defects
T2 - The Potential Application of Biological Forms of Bovine-Bone Filler
AU - Kamadjaja, David Buntoro
AU - Satriyo, Handhito
AU - Setyawan, Aris
AU - Lesmaya, Yeni Dian
AU - Safril, Jefry Wahyudi
AU - Sumarta, Ni Putu Mira
AU - Rizqiawan, Andra
AU - Danudiningrat, Coen Pramono
AU - Tran, Ta To
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag, Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany.
PY - 2022/5/1
Y1 - 2022/5/1
N2 - Objective †This study aimed to evaluate bone regeneration capacity of FDBX granules compared to composite DBBM/DFDBX granules for filling of bone defect in rabbit mandible. Material and Methods †Critical size defects were created in 45 rabbits' mandible. The defect in the control group is left untreated, while in other groups the defects were filled with FDBX granules and composite DBBM/DFDBX granules, respectively. Specimens were collected at 2, 4, and 8 weeks for histology and immunohistochemical analyses. Significant difference is set at p-value < 0.05. Results †The osteoblast-osteoclast quantification, osteoblast expression of Runx2, alkaline phosphatase, collagen-I, and osteocalcin, and osteoclast expression of receptor activator of NF-kB ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) in FDBX groups were statistically comparable (p > 0.05) with the composite group, while OPG/RANKL ratio, bone healing scores, and trabecular area were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in the composite compared to FDBX group. Conclusion †Composite DBBM/DFDBX granules, within the limitation of this study, has better bone forming capacity than FDBX granules for filling of bone defects in the mandible.
AB - Objective †This study aimed to evaluate bone regeneration capacity of FDBX granules compared to composite DBBM/DFDBX granules for filling of bone defect in rabbit mandible. Material and Methods †Critical size defects were created in 45 rabbits' mandible. The defect in the control group is left untreated, while in other groups the defects were filled with FDBX granules and composite DBBM/DFDBX granules, respectively. Specimens were collected at 2, 4, and 8 weeks for histology and immunohistochemical analyses. Significant difference is set at p-value < 0.05. Results †The osteoblast-osteoclast quantification, osteoblast expression of Runx2, alkaline phosphatase, collagen-I, and osteocalcin, and osteoclast expression of receptor activator of NF-kB ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) in FDBX groups were statistically comparable (p > 0.05) with the composite group, while OPG/RANKL ratio, bone healing scores, and trabecular area were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in the composite compared to FDBX group. Conclusion †Composite DBBM/DFDBX granules, within the limitation of this study, has better bone forming capacity than FDBX granules for filling of bone defects in the mandible.
KW - bone filler
KW - bovine
KW - demineralized
KW - deproteinized
KW - innovation
KW - osteoconductive
KW - osteoinductive
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85120671392&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1055/s-0041-1736291
DO - 10.1055/s-0041-1736291
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85120671392
SN - 1305-7456
VL - 16
SP - 403
EP - 413
JO - European Journal of Dentistry
JF - European Journal of Dentistry
IS - 2
ER -