Evaluación del tiempo de espera óptimo para la colocación de implantes dentales tras elevaciones de seno maxilar (ESM) con un injerto compuesto por hueso autólogo y biomaterial

Objetivo: Evaluar el tiempo de espera óptimo para la colocación de implantes dentales tras elevaciones de seno maxilar (ES) con un injerto compuesto con la misma cantidad de hueso autólogo que de biomaterial, a través de biopsias humanas, comparando el hueso regenerado obtenido a los 4-5 meses con el obtenido a los 6-8 meses, teniendo el hueso nativo como referencia. Material y Métodos: Fueron analizadas un total de 26 biopsias de 11 pacientes tras ES. Se crearon dos grupos dependiendo del momento de la colocación del implante: grupo t1 a los 4-5 meses (n=13) y grupo t2 a los 6-8 meses (n=13). Fue analizado por microtomografía computarizada (MicroCT) para cada biopsia el mismo volumen para el hueso injertado que para el nativo. Resultados: Se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la densidad mineral ósea (BMD), fracción de volumen óseo y separación trabecular (Tb.Sp) entre el hueso nativo e injertado en los grupos t1 y t2, mostrando valores más altos en el hueso injertado excepto para la variable Tb.Sp. que sucedió a la inversa. El descenso de la Tb.Sp en el hueso injertado de los dos grupos puede explicarse por el aumento sigificativo del grosor trabecular en el grupo t2 y por el aumento del número trabecular en el grupo t1, comparándolos con el hueso nativo respectivamente. No se encontró ninguna diferencia estadísticamente significativa entre los dos grupos de hueso injertado cuando se compararon los parámetros morfométricos y de BMD. Conclusiones: Un injerto compuesto por 50% hueso autólogo y 50% biomaterial muestra que no hay diferencias en la microestructura 3D ni en la BMD entre 4-5 o 6-8 meses de espera de cicatrización ósea. Por ello este tiempo de cicatrización se puede acortar a 4 meses con la seguridad de un área injertada con hueso maduroPurpose: To evaluate the ideal implant time insertion in human bone biopsies after maxillary sinus floor elevation (MSFE) with a composite graft consisting of an equal amount of biomaterial and autologous bone, by comparing the bone regeneration obtained 4-5 months after surgery with the obtained after 6-8 months, and having the adjacent native bone as reference. Materials and Methods: A total of 26 biopsies of 11 patients after MSFE were analyzed. Two groups were created depending on the time of implant insertion: t1 group at 4-5 months (n=13) and t2 group at 6-8 months (n=13). The same volume of grafted bone and native bone were analyzed for each biopsy by micro-computed tomography (microCT). Results: Statistically significant differences were found in bone mineral density, bone volume fraction and trabecular separation (Tb. Sp) between native and grafted bone in the t1 and t2 groups, showing grafted bone higher values except for the variable Tb.Sp, which were lower in the grafted bone compared to native bone. The decrease in Tb.Sp in the grafted bone for t1 and t2 groups can be explained by the significant increase in trabecular thickness in t2 group and the trabecular number in t1 group, compared to native bone respectively. Comparing the morphometric parameters and the BMD of the grafted bone between the t1 and t2 groups, no significant differences were found. Conclusions: A composite graft composed of 50% autologous bone and 50% biomaterial shows no differences in 3D microstructure and BMD between 4-5 months and 6-8 months of healing time. Thus, this time can be shortened to 4 months with the security of a grafted area of mature bone

Cathodic polarization coats titanium based implant materials with enamel matrix derivate (EMD)

The idea of a bioactive surface coating that enhances bone healing and bone growth is a strong focus of on-going research for bone implant materials. Enamel matrix derivate (EMD) is well documented to support bone regeneration and activates growth of mesenchymal tissues. Thus, it is a prime candidate for coating of existing implant surfaces. The aim of this study was to show that cathodic polarization can be used for coating commercially available implant surfaces with an immobilized but functional and bio-available surface layer of EMD. After coating, XPS revealed EMD-related bindings on the surface while SIMS showed incorporation of EMD into the surface. The hydride layer of the original surface could be activated for coating in an integrated one-step process that did not require any pre-treatment of the surface. SEM images showed nano-spheres and nano-rods on coated surfaces that were EMD-related. Moreover, the surface roughness remained unchanged after coating, as it was shown by optical profilometry. The mass peaks observed in the matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectroscopy (MALDI-TOF MS) analysis confirmed the integrity of EMD after coating. Assessment of the bioavailability suggested that the modified surfaces were active for osteoblast like MC3M3-E1 cells in showing enhanced Coll-1 gene expression and ALP activity

Osteoimmunomodulatory effects of enamel matrix derivate and strontium coating layers: A short- and long-term in vivo study

Over the past few years, surface modification of implant surface has gained substantial attention as a promising solution to avoid the failure of biomaterials after implantation. Although researchers suggest several strategies for surface functionalization of titanium based implants, only few studies have compared the osteoimmunomodulatory effects of ionic nanostructure and biofunctionalization in the same biological model. Enamel matrix derivate (EMD) and strontium are both known for their positive influences on bone cell responses. In this study, we functionalized the titanium-zirconium implant surface with EMD and strontium using an electrochemical cathodic polarization method. Afterwards, we evaluated the osteoimmunomodulatory effects of EMD or strontium coated titanium zirconium implants in the tibia of eight Grey Bastard Chinchillas rabbits. We performed 2&3D micro-CT, wound fluid, histologic, and histomorphometric analyses on bone tissues after 4- and 8-weeks implantation. Although the results could indicate some differences between groups regarding the bone quality, there was no difference in bone amount or volume. EMD stimulated higher ALP activity and lower cytotoxicity in wound fluid, as well as a lower expression of inflammatory markers after 8 weeks indicating its osteoimmunomodulatory effects after implantation. Overall, the results suggested that ionic nanostructure modification and biofunctionalization might be useful in regulating the immune responses to implants