Clinical evaluations of mineralized collagen in the extraction sites preservation

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the different effects between biomimetic mineralized collagen (MC) and ordinary physically blended hydroxyapatite/collagen (HA/Col) composite in evaluating new bone formation and regenerated bone height in human extraction sockets. Thirty-four patients who cannot retain teeth caused by trauma or decay were randomly selected from Department of Stomatology of Dongzhimen Hospital from December 2013 to December 2014. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. After the operation of tooth extraction, 17 patients were implanted with biomimetic MC (MC group), and other 17 patients were implanted with ordinary physically blended nHA/Col composite (nHA/Col group). X-ray positioning projection by auto-photographing was taken to test the distance between the lowest position and the neighboring CEJm-CEJd immediately, 1 month and 3 months after the operation. The height of new bone formation of the MC group was significantly higher than the nHA/Col group. Biomimetic MC showed better clinical outcomes in the bone formation for extraction site preservation and would have broad application prospect in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgeries.

Osseointegration effect of biomimetic intrafibrillarly mineralized collagen applied simultaneously with titanium implant: A pilot in vivo study

“…It is suggested that three conditions must be present for bone induction to occur: (a) an inducing agent; (b) an osteogenic precursor cell; and (c) an environment that is permissive to osteogenesis (Chai et al, ). In this study, possible explanations for the observed bone regeneration and osseointegration include the following: (a) both bone scaffold materials and titanium implants have the capacity for osteoconduction, and IMC materials have promising effects for osteoinduction (Feng et al, ; Liu et al, ; Zhang et al, ); (b) the blood clot dissolved and/or osteogenic growth factors were secreted from the newly formed vessels in the defect to create an osteoinductive environment; and (c) osteogenic cells were provided by the stumps of the defects.…”

“…The difference in new bone formation may be due to differences in the nanostructures of IMC and EMC. Unlike EMC, which is fabricated by a conventional crystallization method and lacks a surface chemistry and nanostructure similar to that of bone extracellular matrix (Hu et al, ; Liu et al, ), IMC is fabricated via a biomimetic strategy to achieve properties that mimic those of native bone (Feng et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liao et al, ; Qiu et al, ). IMC can promote nutrient transport, blood vessel ingrowth, and osteogenic cell migration throughout the scaffold (Liao et al, ; Liu et al, ).…”

“…The EMC can only produce similar chemical properties but not the surface chemistry and nanostructure of bone extracellular matrix; therefore, the strength of EMC is insufficient. Intrafibrillar mineralization (IMC) has been shown to be a predominant factor to the biomechanics of natural bone, and thus, synthesis of mineralized collagen with intrafibrillar HA is recognized as a crucial factor for imitating bone extracellular matrix (Feng et al, ; Fu et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liu et al, ; Qiu et al, ; Xu et al, ; Zhang et al, ). We have previously reported on the fabrication of hierarchical, intrafibrillarly mineralized collagen with distinct nanostructures mimicking the natural bone for use in bone tissue engineering according to the principle of a biomimetic strategy (Feng et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liao, Cui, Zhang, & Feng, ; Xu et al, ; Zhang et al, ).…”

“…Intrafibrillar mineralization (IMC) has been shown to be a predominant factor to the biomechanics of natural bone, and thus, synthesis of mineralized collagen with intrafibrillar HA is recognized as a crucial factor for imitating bone extracellular matrix (Feng et al, ; Fu et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liu et al, ; Qiu et al, ; Xu et al, ; Zhang et al, ). We have previously reported on the fabrication of hierarchical, intrafibrillarly mineralized collagen with distinct nanostructures mimicking the natural bone for use in bone tissue engineering according to the principle of a biomimetic strategy (Feng et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liao, Cui, Zhang, & Feng, ; Xu et al, ; Zhang et al, ). IMC materials have shown impressive promoting effects on osteogenic differentiation and bone regeneration both in vitro and in vivo in studies by our group and others (Feng et al, ; Fu et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liu et al, ; Qiu et al, ; Xu et al, ; Zhang et al, ), suggesting that IMC may be an ideal bone scaffold material in bone tissue engineering.…”

“…We have previously reported on the fabrication of hierarchical, intrafibrillarly mineralized collagen with distinct nanostructures mimicking the natural bone for use in bone tissue engineering according to the principle of a biomimetic strategy (Feng et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liao, Cui, Zhang, & Feng, ; Xu et al, ; Zhang et al, ). IMC materials have shown impressive promoting effects on osteogenic differentiation and bone regeneration both in vitro and in vivo in studies by our group and others (Feng et al, ; Fu et al, ; Lian et al, ; Liu et al, ; Qiu et al, ; Xu et al, ; Zhang et al, ), suggesting that IMC may be an ideal bone scaffold material in bone tissue engineering. Therefore, we propose that the use of IMC with a titanium (Ti) implant placed simultaneously may be a promising strategy for jawbone defect reconstruction that avoids the donor site morbidity associated with the use of autografts and provides immediate improvement in dental function.…”