Journal of Isfahan Dental School

Histological Analysis of Three Types of Allografts (FDBA, DFDBA, Partial) on Bone Repair Quality and Quantity of Artificially Created Defects in Rabbit Calvarium

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Authors

1 Postgraduate Student, Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.

3 Department of Cellular Biotechnology, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Biotechnology, ACECR, Isfahan, Iran.

4 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

5 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.

6 Dentist, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Biotechnology, ACECR, Isfahan, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction: FDBA, DFDBA and PARTIAL allografts are widely used as bone substitute materials. The aim of this study was to histologically compare the regenerative features of these three types of allografts manufactured by Kish Hamanandsaz Company in Iran.
Materials & Methods: In this experimental animal study, four bone defects with a diameter of 8 mm and a depth of approximately 1 mm were produced in the calvaria of 8 rabbits (4 defects in each rabbit) by trephine. In three defects, three types of allografts, i.e. FDBA, DFDBA and PARTIAL, were placed and one defect served as a control. One of the rabbits died 5 days after surgery. Histological samples were prepared after 4 weeks. Percentages of new bone formation and the remaining materials and inflammation were evaluated. Data were analyzed with Friedman and Cochran tests, using SPSS 22 (α = 0.05).
Results: There were significant differences between the four groups (DFDBA, FDBA, PARTIAL and control) in mean percentages of new bone formation (p value = 0.001) and mean percentages of remaining material (p value = 0.002). However, there were no significant differences in inflammation between the four groups (p value = 0.572).
Conclusion: Despite the difference in numerical values for bone regeneration, there were no statistically significant differences in the amount of bone formation between DFDBA and FDBA groups, but further studies are necessary on PARTIAL allograft.
Key words: Allografts, Bone regeneration, Calvarium, Osteogenesis, Rabbit. 

1. Williams RC, Cochran DL, Giannobile WV, Lynch SE. Tissue engineering: what does it mean? Why is it important? Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005; 26(1): 54, 6, 8 passim.
2. Clokie CM, Moghadam H, Jackson MT, Sandor GK. Closure of critical sized defects with allogenic and alloplastic bone substitutes. J Craniofac Surg 2002; 13(1): 111-21.
3. Lee EH, Kim JY, Kweon HY, Jo YY, Min SK, Park YW, et al. A combination graft of low-molecular-weight silk fibroin with Choukroun platelet-rich fibrin for rabbit calvarial defect. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010; 109(5): e33-8.
4. Ziran BH, Hendi P, Smith WR, Westerheide K, Agudelo JF. Osseous healing with a composite of allograft and demineralized bone matrix: adverse effects of smoking. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2007; 36(4): 207-9.
5. Mellonig JT. Histologic and clinical evaluation of an allogeneic bone matrixfor the treatment of periodontal ossous defects. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006; 26(6): 561-9.
6. Ozdemir MT, Kir MC. Repair of long bone defects with demineralized bone matrix and autogenous bone composite. J Orthop 2011; 45(3): 226-30.
7. Rokn A, Moslemi N, Eslami B, Abadi HK, Paknejad M. Histologic Evaluation of Bone Healing Following Application of Anorganic Bovine Bone and β-tricalcium Phosphate in Rabbit Calvaria. J Dent (Tehran) 2012; 9(1): 35-40.
8. Alayan J, Ivanovski S. A prospective controlled trial comparing xenograft/autogenous bone and collagen-stabilized xenograft for maxillary sinus augmentation-Complications, patient-reported outcomes and volumetric analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29(2): 248-62.
9. Wenz B, Oesch B, Horst M. Analysis of the risk of transmitting bovine spongiform encephalopathy through bone grafts derived from bovine bone. Biomaterials 2001; 22(12): 1599-606.
10. Chavda S, Levin L. Human studies of vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation comparing different types of bone graft materials: A systematic review. J Oral Implantol 2018; 44(1): 74-84.
11. Weinraub GM, Cheung CJ. Efficacy of allogenic bone implants in a series of consecutive elective foot procedures. J Foot Ankle Surg 2003; 42(2): 86-9.
12. Rokn AR, Shakeri AS, Etemad-Moghadam S, Alaeddini M, Shamshiri AR, Manasheof R, et al. Regenerative effects of three types of allografts on rabbit calvarium: an animal study. J Dent (Tehran) 2015; 12(11): 823-34.
13. Paknejad M, Rokn A, Rouzmeh N, Heidari M, Titidej A, Kharazifard MJ, et al. Histologic evaluation of bone healing capacity following application of inorganic bovine bone and a new allograft material in rabbit calvaria. J Dent (Tehran) 2015; 12(1): 31-8.
14. Wood RA, Mealey BL. Histologic comparison of healing after tooth extraction with ridge preservation using mineralized versus demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft. J Periodontol 2012; 83(3): 329-36.
15. Yukna RA, Vastardis S. Comparative evaluation of decalcified and non-decalcified freeze-dried bone allografts in rhesus monkeys. I. Histologic findings. J Periodontol 2005; 76(1): 57-65.
16. Penteado LA, Colombo CE, Penteado RA, Assis AO, Gurgel BC. Evaluation of bioactive glass and platelet-rich plasma for bone healing in rabbit calvarial defects. J Oral Sci 2013; 55(3): 225-32.
17. Abed AM, Pestekan RH, Yaghini J, Razavi SM, Tavakoli M, Amjadi M. A comparison of two types of decalcified freeze-dried bone allograft in treatment of dehiscence defects around implants in dogs. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2011; 8(3): 132-7.
18. Rokn AR, Khodadoostan MA, Reza Rasouli Ghahroudi AA, Motahhary P, Kharrazi Fard MJ, Bruyn HD, et al. Bone formation with two types of grafting materials: a histologic and histomorphometric study. Open Dent J 2011; 5: 96-104.
19. Peleg M, Sawatari Y, Marx RN, Santoro J, Cohen J, Bejarano P, et al. Use of corticocancellous allogeneic bone blocks for augmentation of alveolar bone defects. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25 (1): 153-62.
20. Lee DW, Koo KT, Seol YJ, Lee YM, Ku Y, Rhyu IC, et al. Bone regeneration effects of human allogenous bone substitutes: a preliminary study. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2010; 40(3): 132-8.
21. Khoshzaban A, Mehrzad S, Tavakoli V, Keshel SH, Behrouzi GR, Bashtar M. The comparative effectiveness of demineralized bone matrix, beta-tricalcium phosphate, and bovine-derived anorganic bone matrix on inflammation and bone formation using a paired calvarial defect model in rats. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2011; 3: 69-78.
22. Cammack GV 2nd, Nevins M, Clem DS 3rd, Hatch JP, Mellonig JT. Histologic evaluation of mineralized and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft for ridge and sinus augmentations. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2005; 25(3): 231-7.
23. Rummelhart JM, Mellonig JT, Gray JL, Towle HJ. A comparison of freeze-dried bone allograft and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft in human periodontal osseous defects. J Periodontol 1989; 60(12): 655-63.
24. Piattelli A, Scarano A, Corigliano M, Piattelli M. Comparison of bone regeneration with the use of mineralized and demineralized freeze-dried bone allografts: a histological and histochemical study in man. Biomaterials 1996; 17(11): 1127-31.
25. Mellonig JT. Bone allografts in periodontal therapy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; (324): 116-25.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 14, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
October 2018
Pages 419-426