ObjectivesDue to bone loss, endosseous implants often require addition of a bone graft to support adequate primary fixation, bone regeneration, and osseointegration. The aim of this study was to compare effectiveness of autogenic and allogenic bone grafts when used during simultaneous insertion of the implant.Materials and Methods4‐mm‐diameter rabbit diaphyseal bone autografts or allografts (n = 16/group) with a 3.2‐mm pre‐drilled hole in the center were placed into a 4 mm defect in the proximal femur of 3.5 kg male New Zealand White rabbits. Machined 3.2 × 10 mm grit‐blasted, acid‐etched titanium–aluminum–vanadium (Ti6Al4V) implants were placed. Control implants were placed into progressively drilled 3.2‐mm holes in the contralateral limbs. Post‐insertion day 70, samples were analyzed by micro‐CT and calcified histology, or by mechanical torque and push‐out testing followed by decalcified histology.ResultsBoth grafts were integrated with the native bone. Micro‐CT showed less bone volume (BV) and bone volume/total volume (BV/TV) in the allograft group, but histology showed no differences in BV or BV/TV between groups. Allograft lacked living cells, whereas autograft was cellularized. No difference was found in maximum removal torque between groups. Compressive loading at the graft‐to‐bone interface was significantly lower in allograft compared with autograft groups.ConclusionsThere was less bone in contact with the implant and significantly less maximum compressive load in the allograft group compared with autograft. The allograft remained acellular as demonstrated by empty lacunae. Taken together, block allograft implanted simultaneously with an implant produces a poorer quality bone compared with autograft.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.