To evaluate and compare histomorphometrically the bone response to two xenografts, one bovine and the other porcine, grafted in adjacent extraction sockets in a human. In this case report, two adjacent maxillary premolars were extracted, and the sockets were filled with two different xenogeneic bone substitutes (first premolar with bovine bone, and second premolar with porcine bone) to counteract post-extraction volume loss. Following 6 months bone core specimens were harvested during the placement of implants at the regenerated sites. Histomorphometrically, for the bovine xenograft the percentage of newly formed bone (osteoid) was 26.85%, the percentage of the residual graft material was 17.2% and the percentage of connective tissue 48.73%, while for the porcine xenograft, newly formed bone (osteoid) represented 32.19%, residual graft material was 6.57% and non-mineralized connective tissue was 52.99%. Histological results indicated that both biomaterials assessed in this study as grafts for socket preservation technique are biocompatible and osteoconductive. Bovine bone derived demonstrated to be less resorbable than porcine bone derived. Both xenogenic biomaterials did not interfere with the normal bone reparative processes

Histologic evaluation of bone healing of adjacent alveolar sockets grafted with bovine- and porcine-derived bone: a comparative case report in humans / Guarnieri, Renzo; DeVilliers, Patricia; Grande, Maurizio; Stefanelli, Luigi Vito; Di Carlo, Stefano; Pompa, Giorgio. - In: REGENERATIVE BIOMATERIALS. - ISSN 2056-3426. - 4:2(2017), pp. 125-128. [10.1093/rb/rbx002]

Histologic evaluation of bone healing of adjacent alveolar sockets grafted with bovine- and porcine-derived bone: a comparative case report in humans

Stefanelli, Luigi Vito;Di Carlo, Stefano
Penultimo
;
Pompa, Giorgio
Ultimo
2017

Abstract

To evaluate and compare histomorphometrically the bone response to two xenografts, one bovine and the other porcine, grafted in adjacent extraction sockets in a human. In this case report, two adjacent maxillary premolars were extracted, and the sockets were filled with two different xenogeneic bone substitutes (first premolar with bovine bone, and second premolar with porcine bone) to counteract post-extraction volume loss. Following 6 months bone core specimens were harvested during the placement of implants at the regenerated sites. Histomorphometrically, for the bovine xenograft the percentage of newly formed bone (osteoid) was 26.85%, the percentage of the residual graft material was 17.2% and the percentage of connective tissue 48.73%, while for the porcine xenograft, newly formed bone (osteoid) represented 32.19%, residual graft material was 6.57% and non-mineralized connective tissue was 52.99%. Histological results indicated that both biomaterials assessed in this study as grafts for socket preservation technique are biocompatible and osteoconductive. Bovine bone derived demonstrated to be less resorbable than porcine bone derived. Both xenogenic biomaterials did not interfere with the normal bone reparative processes
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Guarnieri_Histologic_2017.pdf

accesso aperto

Note: https://academic.oup.com/rb/article/4/2/125/3075081
Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 356.79 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
356.79 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11573/1100654
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 5
social impact