The aim of this study was to discuss the feasibility of porous mineralized collagen plug and bilayer mineralized collagen-guided bone regeneration membrane in site preservation in extraction sockets. The third mandibular premolars on both sides were extracted from four dogs, thus there were 16 alveolar sockets in all dogs and were randomly assigned into three groups. Group A had six alveolar sockets, and groups B and C had five alveolar sockets, respectively. Each alveolar socket of group A was immediately implanted with a porous mineralized collagen plug and covered with a bilayer mineralized collagen-guided bone regeneration membrane after tooth extraction. Alveolar sockets of group B were implanted with porous mineralized collagen plug only, and group C was set as blank control without any implantation. The healing effects of the extraction sockets were evaluated by gross observation, morphological measurements, and X-ray micro-computed tomography after twelve weeks. Twelve weeks after operation, both groups A and B had more amount of new bone formation compared with group C; in terms of the degree of alveolar bone height, group A was lower than groups B and C with significant differences; the bone mineral density in the region of interest and bone remodeling degree in group A were higher than those of groups B and C. As a result, porous mineralized collagen plug could induce the regeneration of new bone in extraction socket, and combined use of porous mineralized collagen plug and bilayer mineralized collagen guided bone regeneration membrane could further reduce the absorption of alveolar ridge and preserve the socket site.
HuangGWZhuangHShenHP. Clinical application of extracted site preservation in dental implantation. Shanghai J Stomatol2014; 3: 354–355.
2.
SunZYHerringSWTeeBC. Alveolar ridge reduction after tooth extraction in adolescents: an animal study. Arch Oral Biol2013; 58: 813–825.
3.
MardasNTrullenque-ErikssonAMacBethN. Does ridge preservation following tooth ridge preservation following tooth extraction improve implant treatment outcomes: a systematic: therapeutic concepts & methods. Clin Oral Implants Res2015; 10: 1111–1123.
4.
DarbyIChenSDePR. Ridge preservation: what is it and when should it be considered. Aust Dent J2008; 53: 11–21.
5.
ShanLLingQZhenL. An experimental study of alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction in dog. J Prac Med2014; 12: 1883–1886.
6.
AtiehMAAlsabeehaNHPayneAG. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2015; 5: 1002–1014.
7.
RoffiAFilardoGKonE. Does PRP enhance bone integration with grafts, graft substitutes, or implants? A systematic review. BMC Musculoskel Dis2013; 14: 330–341.
8.
LuczyszynSMPapalexiouVNovaesAB Jr. Acellular dermal matrix and hydroxyapatite in prevention of ridge deformities after tooth extraction. Implan Dent2005; 14: 176–184.
9.
PagniGPellegriniGGiannobileWV. Postextraction alveolar ridge preservation: biological basis and treatments. Int J Dent2012; 13: 151–155.
10.
HatakeyamaIMarukawaETakahashiY. Effects of platelet-poor plasma, platelet-rich plasma, and platelet-rich fibrin on healing of extraction sockets with buccal dehiscence in dogs. Tissue Eng Part A2014; 20: 874–882.
11.
CucchiAGhensiP. Vertical guided bone regeneration using titanium-reinforced d-PTFE membrane and prehydrated corticocancellous bone graft. Open Dent J2014; 8: 194–200.
12.
QiuZYCuiYTaoCS. Mineralized collagen: rationale, current status, and clinical applications. Materials2015; 8: 4733–4750.
13.
ZhangWLiaoSSCuiFZ. Hierarchical self-assembly of nano-fibrils in mineralized collagen. Chem Mater2003; 15: 3221–3226.
14.
KouJMFuTYJiaXJ. Clinical observations on repair of non-infected bone nonunion by using mineralized collagen graft. J Biomater Tiss Eng2014; 4: 1107–1112.
15.
DuCCuiFZZhangW. Formation of calcium phosphate/collagen composites through mineralization of collagen matrix. J Biomed Mater Res2000; 50: 518–527.
16.
SrisurangSKantheeraBNaritL. Socket preservation using platelet-rich fibrin in conjunction with epithelialized palatal free graft in minipigs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg Med Pathol2014; 26: 108–117.
17.
DuanHYangHSXiongY. Effects of mechanical loading on the degradability and mechanical properties of the nanocalcium-deficient hydroxyapatite–multi(amino acid) copolymer composite membrane tube for guided bone regeneration. Int J Nanomed2013; 8: 2801–2807.
18.
JamesRDengMLaurencinCT. Nanocomposites and bone regeneration. Front Mater Sci2011; 5: 342–357.
19.
HennessyKMPollotBEClemWC. The effect of collagen I mimetic peptides on mesenchymal stem cell adhesion and differentiation, and on bone formation at hydroxyapatite surfaces. Biomaterials2013; 30: 1898–1909.
20.
LiuKBHuangKTengY. Use of mineralized collagen bone graft substitutes and dorsal locking plate in treatment of elder metaphyseal comminuted distal radius fracture. Front Mater Sci2014; 8: 87–94.
21.
WeiBYaoQGuoY. Three-dimensional polycaprolactone–hydroxyapatite scaffolds combined with bone marrow cells for cartilage tissue engineering. J Biomater Appl2015; 30: 160–170.
22.
LiXYNanKHShiS. Preparation and characterization of nano-hydroxyapatite/chitosan cross-linking composite membrane intended for tissue engineering. Int J Biol Macromol2012; 50: 43–49.
23.
YangCLeeJSJungUW. Periodontal tissue reaction to customized nano-hydroxyapatite block scaffold in one-wall intrabony defect: a histologic study in dogs. J Periodontal Implant Sci2012; 42: 50–58.
24.
HuangCQinLYanW. Clinical evaluation following the use of mineralized collagen graft for bone defects in revision total hip arthroplasty. Regen Biomater2015; 10: 245–249.
25.
LianKLuHGuoXD. The mineralized collagen for the reconstruction of intra-articular calcaneal fractures with trabecular defects. Biomatter2013; 3: 272–277.
26.
LiaoSSGuanKCuiFZ. Lumbar spinal fusion with a mineralized collagen matrix and rhBMP-2 in a rabbit model. Spine2003; 28: 1954–1960.
27.
YuXXuLCuiFZ. Clinical evaluation of mineralized collagen as a bone graft substitute for anterior cervical intersomatic fusion. J Biomater Tiss Eng2012; 2: 170–176.
28.
DuCCuiFZFengQL. Tissue response to nano-hydroxyapatite/collagen composite implants in marrow cavity. J Biomed Mater Res1998; 42: 540–548.
29.
LiaoSSCuiFZZhangW. Hierarchically biomimetic bone scaffold materials: nano-HA/collagen/PLA composite. J Biomed Mater Res B2004; 69: 158–165.
30.
YangJWParkHJYooKH. A comparison study between periosteum and resorbable collagen membrane on iliac block bone graft resorption in the rabbit calvarium. Head Face Med2014; 10: 15–24.
31.
TakataTMiyauchiMWangHL. Migration of osteoblastic cells on various guided bone regeneration membranes. Clin Oral Implants Res2001; 12: 332–338.
32.
JungUWLeeJSLeeG. Role of collagen membrane in lateral onlay grafting with bovine hydroxyapatite incorporated with collagen matrix in dogs. J Periodontal Implant Sci2013; 43: 64–71.
33.
ImaniehHAghahosseiniH. Synthesis and character investigation of new collagen hydrolysate/polyvinyl alcohol/hydroxyapatite polymer-nano-porous membranes: I. Experimental design optimization in thermal and structural properties. Syst Synth Biol2013; 7: 175–184.
34.
MalathiKGDevJNKumarKS. A clinical evaluation of a bioresorbable membrane and porous hydroxyapatite in the treatment of human molar class II furcations. J Indian Soc Periodontol2013; 17: 617–623.
35.
AcarAHYolcuÜGülM. Micro-computed tomography and histomorphometric analysis of the effects of platelet-rich fibrin on bone regeneration in the rabbit calvarium. Arch Oral Biol2015; 60: 606–614.
36.
LvHCZhangLCYangF. Comparison of microstructural and mechanical properties of trabeculae in femoral head from osteoporosis patients with and without cartilage lesions: a case-control study. BMC Musculoskel Dis2015; 16: 72–78.
37.
LegrandEChappardDPascarettiC. Trabecular bone microarchitectural bone mineral density and vertebral fractures in male osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res2012; 16: 1374–1375.
38.
ParkYSKimSOhSH. Comparison of alveolar ridge preservation methods using three-dimensional micro-computed tomographic analysis and two-dimensional histometric evaluation. Imaging Sci Dent2014; 44: 143–148.
39.
BouxseinMLBoydSKChristiansenBA. Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res2010; 25: 1468–1486.
40.
HsuJTChenYJHoJT. A comparison of micro-CT and dental CT in assessing cortical bone morphology and trabecular bone microarchitecture. PLoS One2014; 9: 107–115.
41.
LiuZSYanCGKangC. Distributional variations in trabecular architecture of the mandibular bone: an in vivo micro-CT analysis in rats. PLoS One2015; 10: 116–124.
42.
Al-HamoudiNBissadaNFAl-AskarMH. Ridge preservation surgery after single and multiple adjacent tooth extractions: a microcomputed tomography study in dogs. Int J Oral Max Impl2015; 30: 315–320.
43.
LeeJSParkWYChaJK. Periodontal tissue reaction to customized nano-hydroxyapatite block scaffold in one-wall intrabony defect: a histologic study in dogs. J Periodontal Implant Sci2012; 42: 50–58.
44.
SowmyaNKKumarABTMehtaDS. Clinical evaluation of regenerative potential of type I collagen membrane along with xenogenic bone graft in the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects assessed with surgical re-entry and radiographic linear and densitometric analysis. J Indian Soc Periodontol2010; 14: 23–29.
45.
GudaTWalkerJASingletonBM. Guided bone regeneration in long-bone defect with a structural hydroxyapatite graft and membrane. Tissue Eng Part A2012; 19: 1879–1888.
46.
SinghVPNayakDGUppoorAS. Clinical andradiographic evaluation of nano-crystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft (Sybograf) in combination with bioresorbable collagen membrane (Periocol) in periodontal intrabony defects. J Dent Res2012; 9: 60–67.
47.
PhippsMCClemWCCatledgeSA. Mesenchymal stem cell responses to bone-mimetic electrospun matrices composed of polycaprolactone, collagen I nanoparticulate and hydroxyapatite. PLoS One2011; 6: 168–176.
48.
DimitriouRMataliotakisGICaloriGM. The role of barrier membranes for guided bone regeneration and restoration of large bone defects: current experimental and clinical evidence. BMC Med2012; 10: 81–87.
49.
ChungYMLeeJYJeongSN. Comparative study of two collagen membranes for guided tissue regeneration therapy in periodontal intrabony defects: a randomized clinical trial. J Periodontal Implant Sci2014; 44: 194–200.
