Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles as Injectable Bone Substitute Material in a Vertical Bone Augmentation Model

Radiological Comparative Study Between Conventional and Nano Hydroxyapatite With Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) Membranes for Their Effects on Alveolar Bone Density

BACKGROUND

The entry of the concept of nanotechnologies into the field of biomaterials has improved the results of their use in regenerative therapies based on the principles of tissue engineering, due to its improvement of the physical properties of materials manufactured in this way, so it has become possible to produce particles of hydroxyapatite in nano sizes.

AIM OF THE STUDY

This study will evaluate the efficacy of applying nanohydroxyapatite paste and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) as a barrier membrane in comparison with traditional hydroxyapatite (a powder consisting of macro-sized particles) and PRF as a barrier membrane in symmetrically extracted alveoli of the mandible.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The research sample consisted of 40 lower alveoli (symmetrical) of the extracted teeth. The study samples were divided randomly into two groups. Group 1: A paste of nanohydroxyapatite with PRF as a barrier membrane was applied to one side of the extraction. Group 2: Hydroxyapatite powder with PRF as a barrier membrane was applied to the alveolus from the opposite side of Group 1 (the opposite side of the extraction). Three radiographs were performed by cone beam conventional tomography (CBCT) in three consecutive periods to conduct the radiological study (T0: immediately after extraction and grafting, T1: after three months, T2: after six months).

RESULTS

 The mean of the radiographic bone density of the hydroxyapatite powder group at time T0 is 824.36 HU with a standard deviation of ±277.29 HU, and at time T1 is 1119.93 HU with a standard deviation of ±306.93 HU, and at time T2 is 1074.14 HU with a standard deviation of ±223.62 HU, with statistically significant differences when comparing the amount of change in radiographic bone density at time T0 and T1 with P < 0.05, and at time T0 and T2 with P < 0.05, but there were no significant differences when comparing the amount of change in radiographic bone density in T1 and T2 times with P > 0.05. The mean radiographic bone density of the nanohydroxyapatite paste group at time T0 is 629.88 HU with a standard deviation of ±193.64 HU, and at time T1 is 960.67 HU with a standard deviation of ±256.88 HU, and at time T2 is 743.87 HU with a standard deviation of ±180.96 HU, and in the time T0 and T1 with P < 0.05, and in the time T0 and T2 with P < 0.05, and in the time T1 and T2 with P < 0.05. Statistically, significant differences have been found between bone density change T1, T2 in the nanohydroxyapatite paste group and bone density change T1, T2 in the hydroxyapatite powder group P<0.05, which expresses a greater loss of density in the nanohydroxyapatite group, and thus the resorption of the bone graft and the placement of new bone tissue.

CONCLUSION

Within the limits of our study, the results demonstrated that the use of traditional hydroxyapatite powder and nanohydroxyapatite paste increases the radiographic bone density, nanohydroxyapatite paste has a greater absorbency after 3 months compared with traditional hydroxyapatite powder which helps replace it by natural bone tissue.

Cellular and sub-chronic toxicity of hydroxyapatite porous beads loaded with antibiotic in rabbits, indented for chronic osteomyelitis

Bioceramics have emerged as a hopeful remedy for site-specific drug delivery in orthopaedic complications, especially in chronic osteomyelitis. The bioresorbable nature of bioceramic materials shaped them into a versatile class of local antibiotic delivery systems in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis. Hydroxyapatite (HA) based bioceramics with natural bone mimicking chemical composition are of particular interest due to their excellent biocompatibility, better osteoconductive and osteointegrative properties. Although HA has been widely recognized as an efficient tool for local delivery of antibiotics, information regarding its subchronic systemic toxicity have not been explored yet. Moreover, a detailed investigation of in vivo subchronic systemic toxicity of HA is critical for understanding its biocompatibility and futuristic clinical applications of these materials as novel therapeutic system in its long haul. Evaluation of biocompatibility and sub-chronic systemic toxicity are significant determinants in ensuring biomedical device's long-term functionality and success. Sub-chronic systemic toxicity allows assessing the potential adverse effects caused by leachable and nanosized wear particles from the device materials under permissible human exposure to the distant organs that are not in direct contact with the devices. In this context, the present study evaluates the sub-chronic systemic toxicity of in-house developed Hydroxyapatite porous beads (HAPB), gentamicin-loaded HAPB (HAPB + G) and vancomycin- loaded HAPB (HAPB + V) through 4 and 26-week muscle implantation in New Zealand white rabbits, as per ISO 10993-6 and ISO 10993-11. Analysis of cellular responses of HAPB towards Human Osteosarcoma (HOS) cell line through MTT assay, direct contact cytotoxicity, live/dead assay based on Imaging Flow Cytometry (IFC) showed its non-cytotoxic behaviour. Histopathological analysis of muscle tissue, organs like heart, lungs, liver, kidney, spleen, adrenals, intestine, testes, ovaries, and uterus did not reveal any abnormal biological responses. Our study concludes that the HAPB, gentamicin-loaded HAPB (HAPB + G) and vancomycin-loaded HAPB (HAPB + V) are biocompatible and did not induce sub-chronic systemic toxicity and hence satisfies the criteria for regulatory approval of HAs as a plausible candidate for clinical applications.

Cytocompatibility of Bone Substitute Materials and Membranes

BACKGROUND/AIM

With the demographic change and associated chronic bone loss, the need for cytocompatible bone replacement materials arise in modern medicine. The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the cytocompatibility of eleven different bone substitute materials and membranes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seven bone substitute materials and four membranes were assessed in vitro. The specimens were tested based on their interaction with MC3T3 pre-osteoblasts, through the utilization of viability, proliferation, and cytotoxicity assays. Cell vitality was evaluated using live-dead staining.

RESULTS

Although we found minor differences in cytocompatibility among the assessed materials, all tested materials can be considered as cytocompatible with a viability of more than 70% of the negative control, which indicates the non-toxic range as defined in current, international standards (DIN EN ISO 10993-5:2009, German Institute for Standardization, Berlin, Germany). Direct live-dead staining assays confirmed satisfactory cytocompatibility of all tested membranes.

CONCLUSION

All examined bone substitute materials and membranes were found to be cytocompatible. In order to assess whether the observed minor differences can impact regenerative processes, further in vivo studies need to be conducted.

Synthetic Injectable Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration in Animal and Human Studies

After tooth extraction, the alveolar ridge undergoes dimensional changes. Different bone regeneration biomaterials are used to reduce bone loss. The aim of this article was to systematically review the literature on the effect of injectable synthetic biomaterials and their advantages and disadvantages for new bone formation in the maxilla and mandible in animals and humans. A literature search was conducted in November 2020 via MEDLINE PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. Of the 501 records screened, abstract analysis was performed on 49 articles, resulting in 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Animal studies have shown heterogeneity in terms of animal models, follow-up time, composition of the injectable biomaterial, and different outcome variables such as bone–implant contact, newly formed bone, and peri-implant bone density. Heterogeneity has also been demonstrated by human studies. The following outcomes were observed: newly formed bone, connective tissue, residual injectable bone graft substitute, radiographic density, residual bone height, and different follow-up periods. Further studies, especially in humans, based on the histological and biomechanical properties of the injectable delivery form, are needed to draw more concrete conclusions that will contribute to a better understanding of the benefits of this type of biomaterials and their role in bone regeneration.