Comparing osteogenic effects between concentrated growth factors and the acellular dermal matrix

Abstract

Concentrated growth factor (CGF) is an autogenuous product that contains highly concentrated number of platelets and can be derived from venous blood by selective centrifugation. It has been speculated that local growth factors in human platelets (insulinlike growth factor, IGF; transforming growth factor, TGF-b; platelet derived growth factor, PDGF) would enhance healing of grafts and also counteract resorption. The osteogensis effect of CGF and acellular dermal matrix (ADM) for alveolar cleft defects was evaluated in this study. Twenty alveolar cleft patients were divided randomly into two groups. One group underwent guided bone regeneration (GBR) using acellular dermal matrix film combined with alveolar bone grafting using iliac crest bone grafts (GBR group), while the other group underwent alveolar bone grafting combined with CGF (CGF group). Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were obtained at 1 week and 6 months following the procedure. Using Mimics 17.0 software, the bone resorption rate and bone density improvement rate were calculated and compared between the two groups. Although not significant between ADM and CGF in bone resorption rate, the bone density improvement in cases with CGF(61.62 ± 4.728%) was much better than in cases with ADM (27.05 ± 5.607%) (p = 0.0002). Thus, CGF could be recommended to patients with alveolar cleft as a better choice.

Growth Factors in Oral Tissue Engineering: New Perspectives and Current Therapeutic Options

“…A higher morbidity was reported in the control group during surgery, and the biopsy revealed better results about mineralized tissue in the control group; but there are no significant differences between groups on horizontal width. Huang et al [ 38 ] evaluated the effect of concentrated growth factor during GBR (guided bone regeneration). They performed a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) evaluating the bone resorption rate and the bone density improvement with better results in CGF group than in ADM (acellular dermal matrix) group.…”

“…Thoma et al [ 37 ] concluded that both treatment modalities were successful in regenerating bone, despite there were more mineralized tissues in the autogenous block group pain during surgery favour the test group. Huang et al [ 38 ] concluded that the use of CGF derived by venous blood by centrifugation could be recommended to patients with alveolar cleft as a better performing therapeutic strategy. Dragonas et al [ 42 ] affirmed that direct conclusions regarding the positive or negative effects of rhBMP-2 in bone augmentation cannot be made, but based on the ridge resorption using this approach, the decision was made to complete the second ridge augmentation using a different regenerative approach, using only xenograft, which has been shown to maintain augmentation dimensions predictably over time.…”

“…Among the new methods used to increase tissue regenerative potential, in the last decade, the introduction of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), a platelet concentrates rich in growth factors (GFs), whose use would seem to determine an increased speed of bone and mucosal healing [ 38 , 63 – 65 ].…”

Regenerative Strategies in Cleft Palate: An Umbrella Review

“…Besides the bone regeneration capacity, these strategies can modulate inflammation and enhance the healing process [22]. Many substitute materials or agents alone or combined with autogenous bone have been suggested to regenerate bone, such as growth factors like bone morphogenic protein 2 (BMP-2) platelet-rich fibrin, bone scaffolds with or without cell treatment (e.g., mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) or osteoblast), biocomposites (e.g., calcium phosphate and hydroxyapatite) and haemostatic agents (e.g., fibrin glue) [16,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. Stem cellbased therapies have been explored based on several stem cell types: bone-marrow stem cells, adipose-derived stem cells, umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells, and others [30,31].…”

Growth Factor Applied to Oral and Regenerative Surgery

“…In conclusion, it can be said that, for bone tissue, in vivo regeneration techniques are to be preferred, preferably using autologous bone as an osteoconductive and osteogenic matrix considering that the bone structure is also the result of the biomechanical environment in which the bone graft develops and matures. In conclusion, growth factors can improve surgical outcomes (improvement in bone height and thickness) compared to conventional techniques (without the use of growth factors), both in the systemic field of the patient (improvement in quality of life) [ 3 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Of course, further studies are still needed to analyze in detail the differences between different growth factors and their performance.…”