Effects of anodized implants coated with Escherichia coli-derived rhBMP-2 in beagle dogs

Huh, Jung-Bo; Kim, Sung Eun; Kim, Hyo Eon; Kang, Seong Soo; Choi, Kyung Hee; Jeong, Chang Mo; Lee, Jeong Yol; Shin, Sang Wan

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2012.04.005

Cited by 24 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Six studies used local defect models. In five studies, implants were partly placed supracrestally, [15][16][17][18][19] in one a periimplant gap model 11 was created. The remaining 24 studies applied no defect models.…”

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In proximity to the surface, the collagen/CS coating influenced bone formation positively. Five studies [15][16][17][18][19] investigated supraalveolar defect models. BMP-2 was used as a coating component in three of these studies.…”

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…BMP-2 was used as a coating component in three of these studies. 15,16,19 The reference surface in all cases was anodically oxidized titanium. The test surfaces with a rhBMP-2 surface-coating were on anodically oxidized titanium in all three studies 15,16,19 ; the surface in the Wikesjo study was further defined as being a porous oxide.…”

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…15,16,19 The reference surface in all cases was anodically oxidized titanium. The test surfaces with a rhBMP-2 surface-coating were on anodically oxidized titanium in all three studies 15,16,19 ; the surface in the Wikesjo study was further defined as being a porous oxide. The authors concluded that rhBMP-2 coated anodized implants could stimulate bone formation and increase stability significantly on completely healed alveolar ridges in dogs, while rhBMP-2 on porous oxide implant surfaces induced relevant local bone formation, including vertical augmentation of the alveolar ridge and osseointegration.…”

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive 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 4 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

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristics and Descriptive Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effect Of Coatingmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 3 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

show abstract

Adding Functions to Biomaterial Surfaces through Protein Incorporation

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of biomaterials has evolved from one of inert mechanical supports with a long-term, biologically inactive role in the body into complex matrices that exhibit selective cell binding, promote proliferation and matrix production, and may ultimately become replaced by newly generated tissues in vivo. Functionalization of material surfaces with biomolecules is critical to their ability to evade immunorecognition, interact productively with surrounding tissues and extracellular matrix, and avoid bacterial colonization. Antibody molecules and their derived fragments are commonly immobilized on materials to mediate coating with specific cell types in fields such as stent endothelialization and drug delivery. The incorporation of growth factors into biomaterials has found application in promoting and accelerating bone formation in osteogenerative and related applications. Peptides and extracellular matrix proteins can impart biomolecule- and cell-specificities to materials while antimicrobial peptides have found roles in preventing biofilm formation on devices and implants. In this progress report, we detail developments in the use of diverse proteins and peptides to modify the surfaces of hard biomaterials in vivo and in vitro. Chemical approaches to immobilizing active biomolecules are presented, as well as platform technologies for isolation or generation of natural or synthetic molecules suitable for biomaterial functionalization.

show abstract

In vivo evaluation of 3D printed polycaprolactone composite scaffold and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2 for vertical bone augmentation with simultaneous implant placement on rabbit calvaria

Chang¹,

Lee

Jeong

et al. 2021

J Biomed Mater Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated 3D printed polycaprolactone (PCL) composite scaffold and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2), loaded either onto a PCL composite scaffold or implant surface, for vertical bone augmentation with implant placement. Three-dimensional printed PCL frames were filled with powdered PCL, hydroxyapatite, and β-tricalcium phosphate. RhBMP-2 was loaded to the PCL composite scaffolds and implant surfaces, and rhBMP-2 release was quantified for 21 days. Experimental implants were placed bilaterally on 20 rabbit calvaria, and the PCL composite scaffolds were vertically augmented. The randomly allocated experimental groups were divided by carrier and rhBMP-2 dosage as no rhBMP-2 (control), 5 μg rhBMP-2 loaded to PCL composite (Scaffold/rhBMP-2[5 μg]), 5 μg rhBMP-2 loaded to implant (Implant/rhBMP-2[5 μg]), 30 μg rhBMP-2 loaded to PCL composite (Scaffold/rhBMP-2[30 μg]), and 30 μg rhBMP-2 loaded to implant (Implant/rhBMP-2 [30 μg]). Histologic and histometric analyses were conducted after 8 weeks. In both scaffold-loading and implant-loading, rhBMP-2 released initially rapidly, then slowly and constantly. Released rhBMP-2 totaled 23.02 ± 1.03% and 24.69 ± 1.14% in the scaffold-loaded and implant-loaded groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in histologic bone-implant contact (%). Peri-implant bone density (%) was significantly higher in the Scaffold/rhBMP-2(30 μg) and Implant/rhBMP-2(30 μg) groups. Total bone density (%) was not significantly different between the Scaffold/ rhBMP-2(5 μg), Implant/rhBMP-2(5 μg), and control groups, or between the Scaffold/rhBMP-2(30 μg) and Implant/rhBMP-2(30 μg) groups, but was significantly higher in the Scaffold/rhBMP-2(30 μg) and Implant/rhBMP-2(30 μg) groups than in the controls. Three-dimensional printed PCL composite scaffold with rhBMP-2 produced vertical osteogenesis and osseointegration, regardless of rhBMP-2 loading to the PCL composite scaffold or implant surface.Yun-Young Chang and Sa-Ya Lee contributed equally to this study.

show abstract

Effects of anodized implants coated with Escherichia coli-derived rhBMP-2 in beagle dogs

Cited by 24 publications

References 29 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

Adding Functions to Biomaterial Surfaces through Protein Incorporation

In vivo evaluation of 3D printed polycaprolactone composite scaffold and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2 for vertical bone augmentation with simultaneous implant placement on rabbit calvaria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About