Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials

Aim An allograft, a xenograft and an alloplastic graft, associated to sinus lift or ridge preservation procedures were histologically studied to evaluate their characteristics and to obtain the percentages of bone and remaining graft particles. This may help the clinician to determine, form the hist...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: C.E. Nappe, A.B. Rezuc, A. Montecinos, F.A. Donoso, A.J. Vergara, B. Martinez
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Ariesdue 2016-11-01
Series:Journal of Osseointegration
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.journalofosseointegration.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/JO_2016_02_2.pdf
id doaj-86b735381e5c423c8e20c0b9e7cfe7dd
record_format Article
spelling doaj-86b735381e5c423c8e20c0b9e7cfe7dd2020-11-25T03:12:27ZengAriesdueJournal of Osseointegration2036-413X2036-41212016-11-01822026Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials C.E. Nappe0A.B. Rezuc1A. Montecinos2F.A. Donoso3A.J. Vergara4B. Martinez5Universidad Mayor, Santiago, ChileUniversidad Mayor, Santiago, ChileUniversidad Mayor, Santiago, ChileUniversidad Mayor, Santiago, ChileUniversidad Mayor, Santiago, ChileUniversidad Mayor, Santiago, ChileAim An allograft, a xenograft and an alloplastic graft, associated to sinus lift or ridge preservation procedures were histologically studied to evaluate their characteristics and to obtain the percentages of bone and remaining graft particles. This may help the clinician to determine, form the histological point of view, if they are viable alternatives to the use of autograft in bone regeneration procedures. Materials and methods Twenty-five samples from 18 subjects were histologically evaluated with respect to newly formed bone and remaining graft particles percentage. Results The three studied grafting materials presented adequate osteoconduction characteristics. Differences in newly formed bone percentage were found between the allograft and the xenograft, whereas no differences were found between the allograft and the alloplastic graft or the xenograft and the alloplastic graft. There were no significant differences in the percentage of residual particles amongst the different types of graft. Conclusions All studied bone substitute materials showed good characteristics for their use in bone regeneration therapies.http://www.journalofosseointegration.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/JO_2016_02_2.pdfllograftAlveolar bone graftingBone regenerationBone substituteXenograftTricalcium phosphate
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author C.E. Nappe
A.B. Rezuc
A. Montecinos
F.A. Donoso
A.J. Vergara
B. Martinez
spellingShingle C.E. Nappe
A.B. Rezuc
A. Montecinos
F.A. Donoso
A.J. Vergara
B. Martinez
Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials
Journal of Osseointegration
llograft
Alveolar bone grafting
Bone regeneration
Bone substitute
Xenograft
Tricalcium phosphate
author_facet C.E. Nappe
A.B. Rezuc
A. Montecinos
F.A. Donoso
A.J. Vergara
B. Martinez
author_sort C.E. Nappe
title Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials
title_short Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials
title_full Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials
title_fullStr Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials
title_full_unstemmed Histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials
title_sort histological comparison of an allograft, a xenograft and alloplastic graft as bone substitute materials
publisher Ariesdue
series Journal of Osseointegration
issn 2036-413X
2036-4121
publishDate 2016-11-01
description Aim An allograft, a xenograft and an alloplastic graft, associated to sinus lift or ridge preservation procedures were histologically studied to evaluate their characteristics and to obtain the percentages of bone and remaining graft particles. This may help the clinician to determine, form the histological point of view, if they are viable alternatives to the use of autograft in bone regeneration procedures. Materials and methods Twenty-five samples from 18 subjects were histologically evaluated with respect to newly formed bone and remaining graft particles percentage. Results The three studied grafting materials presented adequate osteoconduction characteristics. Differences in newly formed bone percentage were found between the allograft and the xenograft, whereas no differences were found between the allograft and the alloplastic graft or the xenograft and the alloplastic graft. There were no significant differences in the percentage of residual particles amongst the different types of graft. Conclusions All studied bone substitute materials showed good characteristics for their use in bone regeneration therapies.
topic llograft
Alveolar bone grafting
Bone regeneration
Bone substitute
Xenograft
Tricalcium phosphate
url http://www.journalofosseointegration.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/JO_2016_02_2.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT cenappe histologicalcomparisonofanallograftaxenograftandalloplasticgraftasbonesubstitutematerials
AT abrezuc histologicalcomparisonofanallograftaxenograftandalloplasticgraftasbonesubstitutematerials
AT amontecinos histologicalcomparisonofanallograftaxenograftandalloplasticgraftasbonesubstitutematerials
AT fadonoso histologicalcomparisonofanallograftaxenograftandalloplasticgraftasbonesubstitutematerials
AT ajvergara histologicalcomparisonofanallograftaxenograftandalloplasticgraftasbonesubstitutematerials
AT bmartinez histologicalcomparisonofanallograftaxenograftandalloplasticgraftasbonesubstitutematerials
_version_ 1724650253232111616