A Clinical Report of Bone Regeneration in Maxillofacial Surgery using Bonelike ® Synthetic Bone Graft

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate the osteoconductivity and bioactivity of the Bonelike Õ graft in repairing surgical cystic bone defects. Bonelike Õ is implanted in 11 patients, aged between 24 and 53 years with a mean age of 36 years, consisting of 5 men and 6 women. According to the standard follow up protocols, radiological examinations are performed and Bonelike Õ /bone retrieved samples have been analyzed histologically using nondecalcified sections obtained perpendicular to bone length axis. Radiographic examination and histological results clearly demonstrate an extensive new bone formation apposed on Bonelike Õ granules with a significant degree of maturation. These clinical applications in maxillary bone defects indicate perfect bone bonding between new bone formed and Bonelike Õ granules, along with partial surface biodegradation. This quick and effective osteoconductive response from Bonelike Õ may reduce the time needed to reconstruct the bone defected area of patients.

In vivo systemic toxicity assessment of an oxidized dextrin‐based hydrogel and its effectiveness as a carrier and stabilizer of granular synthetic bone substitutes

“…73,74 Furthermore, the presence of glass in this formulation allows the introduction of several ions into BL composition, such as magnesium, fluoride, and sodium, making it possible to achieve a chemical composition closer to the mineral phase of the bone. [76][77][78][79] However, clinical applications were often performed using autologous blood as a carrier for the granules, which raises the need for a more adequate and less invasive vehicle to better stabilize the granules in large defects or unstable sites, avoiding dispersion or medullar infiltration. [76][77][78][79] However, clinical applications were often performed using autologous blood as a carrier for the granules, which raises the need for a more adequate and less invasive vehicle to better stabilize the granules in large defects or unstable sites, avoiding dispersion or medullar infiltration.…”

Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration

“…A bioactive glass reinforced with hydroxyapatite registered as Bonelike was used. All patients showed good bone regeneration after forty-eight weeks (9). When considering tissue engineering, an ideal bone substitute should possess the following design requirements: a) biocompatibility, b) conductivity for attachment and proliferation of committed cells or heir progenitors and production of new extracellular matrix, c) ability to incorporate inductive factors to direct and enhance new tissue growth, d) support of vascular ingrowth for oxygen transport, e) mechanical integrity to support loads at the implant site, f) controlled, predictable, reproducible rate of degradation into non-toxic species that are easily metabolized or excreted and g) easy and cost-effective processing into irregular 3D shapes of sufficient size to fill clinically relevant defects (2).…”

“…We searched in PubMed for Bone Transplantation using the following inclusion criteria: articles published after July 2007, studies in adults between the ages of 19 and 44 and the articles had to be published in English or Spanish. Out of 559 articles 2 were selected (9,12). Over 12,000 articles were found for Bone Regeneration.…”

“…Autografts have primarily been the material of choice to replace lost bone, although the use of autografts comes with some disadvantages such as the limited quantity available and its use also requires additional surgical procedures, and therefore, longer surgical time and possible complications of the wound of the donor site such as bleeding, pain and infection among others (1,2,(6)(7)(8). Allografts and xenografts have the potential of transferring pathogens (2,9). To avoid the biological risk, these materials are subjected to exhaustive procedures which have dramatic effects primarily on their osteogenic and osteoinductive properties and these procedures can also reduce their structural integrity leading to graft fracture (2,6,8).…”

Osteoinduction test of anorthite by human mesenchymal stem cell culture

“…Those problems motivated the development of biomaterials to be used as synthetic scaffolds that must simulate the bone physicochemical environment and suffer degradation after complete their function of anchoring the new bone without, however, liberate toxic substances in the host organism 2 . In addition, preferentially, these materials have to be osteoinductors or have to induce bone formation and to be osteoconductor or have to allow the bone ingrowths [4][5][6] . In order to stimulate the bone growths in porous and biodegradable scaffolds, they have been cultivated by stem cells, so the tridimensional graft promotes a fundamental anchorage to cellular adhesion, proliferation and differentiation in osteoblasts 7 .…”