Bone formation at recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2‐coated titanium implants in the posterior maxilla (Type IV bone) in non‐human primates

Wikesjö, Ulf M.E.; Huang, Yi Hao; Xiropaidis, Andreas V.; Sorensen, Rachel G.; Rohrer, Michael D.; Prasad, Hari; Wozney, John M.; Hall, Jan

doi:10.1111/j.1600-051x.2008.01322.x

Cited by 57 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Wikesjo et al 10,19,37 X (***) X (*) 29. Wikesjo et al 10,19,37 X (***) X (*****) 30. Wikesjo et al 10,19,37 X (***) X (*)…”

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsunclassified

“…Schliephake et al 36 RGD Collagen 1 Dog Mandible 12. Schliephake et al 26 HA 10,19,37 BMP-2 Dog Mandible Table III shows 19 studies with its surface components, animal models, and implant location.…”

Section: Synthesis Of Meta-analysis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, it is possible that GF activity is reduced due to the immobilization process. 9,10,15,16,19,[23][24][25]28,[35][36][37] The same considerations apply to the other growth factors used (Table III), perhaps even to a greater degree as their effects on bone growth can be expected to be generally lower than that of BMP. 38 There was only one exception to the negligible effect of GF on BIC that can be seen if only pig models are considered (see later).…”

Section: Effect Of Coatingmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review and meta‐analysis on the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation

Jenny

Jauernik

Bierbaum

et al. 2016

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation in comparison to an uncoated titanium reference surface in experimental large animal models. The analysis was structured according to the PRISMA criteriae. Of the1077 studies, 30 studies met the inclusion criteriae. Nineteen studies examined the bone implant contact (BIC) and were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the mean increase in BIC for the test surfaces compared to the reference surfaces was 3.7 percentage points (pp) (95% CI -3.9-11.2, p = 0.339). Analyzing the increase in BIC for specific coated surfaces in comparison to uncoated reference surfaces, inorganic surface coatings showed a significant mean increase in BIC of 14.7 pp (95% CI 10.6-18.9, p < 0.01), extracellular matrix (ECM) surface coatings showed an increase of 10.0 pp (95% CI 4.4-15.6, p < 0.001), and peptide coatings showed a statistical trend with 7.1 pp BIC increase (95% CI -0.8-15.0, p = 0.08). In this review, no statistically significant difference could be found for growth factor surface coatings (observed difference -3.3 pp, 95% CI -16.5-9.9, p = 0.6). All analyses are exploratory in nature. The results show a statistically significant effect of inorganic and ECM coatings on periimplant bone formation. Abstract: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation in comparison to an uncoated titanium reference surface in experimental large animal models. The analysis was structured according to the PRISMA criteriae. Of the1077 studies, 30 studies met the inclusion criteriae. Nineteen studies examined the bone implant contact (BIC) and were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the mean increase in BIC for the test surfaces compared to the reference surfaces was 3.7 percentage points (pp) (95% CI 23.9-11.2, p 5 0.339). Analyzing the increase in BIC for specific coated surfaces in comparison to uncoated reference surfaces, inorganic surface coatings showed a significant mean increase in BIC of 14.7 pp (95% CI 10.6-18.9, p < 0.01), extracellular matrix (ECM) surface coatings showed an increase of 10.0 pp (95% CI 4.4-15.6, p < 0.001), and peptide coatings showed a statistical trend with 7.1 pp BIC increase (95% CI 20.8-15.0, p 5 0.08). In this review, no statistically significant difference could be found for growth factor surface coatings (observed difference 23.3 pp, 95% CI 216.5-9.9, p 5 0.6). All analyses are exploratory in nature. The results show a statistically significant effect of inorganic and ECM coatings on periimplant bone formation.

show abstract

“…Wikesjo et al 10,19,37 X (***) X (*) 29. Wikesjo et al 10,19,37 X (***) X (*****) 30. Wikesjo et al 10,19,37 X (***) X (*)…”

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsunclassified

Section: Synthesis Of Meta-analysis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effect Of Coatingmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review and meta‐analysis on the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation

Jenny

Jauernik

Bierbaum

et al. 2016

J Biomedical Materials Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, various methods have been used to incorporate BMPs into dental implants [33][34][35]. Ti alloy implants bearing a fine, dense, amorphous layer of calcium phosphate were immersed in a supersaturated solution of calcium phosphate containing growth factors such as BMP-2 for 48 h under physiological conditions of temperature (37°C) and pH (7.4).…”

Section: Polypeptidementioning

confidence: 99%

Research Progress on the Biochemical Modification of Titanium Implant Surface

Mao¹

2014

Med chem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although both BMPs and GFs hold theoretical potential for earlier osseointegration, their method of sustained delivery continues to be challenging [1] although some experiments show the potential of biological enhancement [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of a Keratin Hydrogel Coating on Osseointegration: An Histological Comparison of Coated and Non-coated Dental Titanium Implants in an Ovine Model

Campbell

Duncan

2013

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioactive substances may be used to enhance the rate and quantity of bone healing during osseointegration of titanium dental implants. A pilot observational study was undertaken to assess a novel keratin hydrogel in six adult sheep utilising the femoral condyles as the surgical site to assess osseointegration. Implants and osteotomy sites were coated with the keratin gel prior to implant placement (test implants) whereas the opposite knee received unmodified control implants in each animal. Fifty 3.5 mm 9 7 mm Neoss dental implants were surgically implanted with a range of 3-5 Neoss dental implants placed per surgical site in each knee and allowed to heal for 5 days or 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16 weeks prior to the sheep being sacrificed. Of the 50 placed implants, 24 were used for this study and analysed via resin-embedded, undemineralised sections from test and control implants to assess the range of healing around the unloaded dental implants. These dental implants were analysed using histomorphometric methods for the best 3 consecutive threads on each side and the percentage of bone to implant contact (%BIC) was used to determine the degree of osseointegration between test and control dental implants at each time point. All implants appeared osseointegrated at the time of sacrifice. One each of the pairs of control implants at 2, 4 and 12 weeks demonstrated minimal integration histologically, with %BIC\10 %. No test implants had %BIC \35 % at any time point. Mean %BIC for test implants was higher than controls at all time points except 5 days and 2 weeks. The range from 2 to 16 weeks healing was 39.7 % [SD 25.5 %] to 85.4 % [14.2 %] for test implants and 35.6 % [43.4 %] to 46.6 % [23.1 %] for controls. %BIC appeared to increase earlier in the test implants (from 4 weeks onwards) compared to controls. After 16 weeks, %BIC was almost twice as great in test implants as controls. This pilot observational study suggests that keratin hydrogel may promote earlier osseointegration around titanium dental implants. Further cross-sectional studies with larger sample sizes are warranted. The most marked difference between test and control implants was seen after 4 weeks. It is recommended that future studies in this model focus on healing after 4 weeks.

show abstract

Bone formation at recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2‐coated titanium implants in the posterior maxilla (Type IV bone) in non‐human primates

Cited by 57 publications

References 45 publications

A systematic review and meta‐analysis on the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation

A systematic review and meta‐analysis on the influence of biological implant surface coatings on periimplant bone formation

Research Progress on the Biochemical Modification of Titanium Implant Surface

The Effect of a Keratin Hydrogel Coating on Osseointegration: An Histological Comparison of Coated and Non-coated Dental Titanium Implants in an Ovine Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About