A comparison of ProOsteon, DBX, and Collagraft in a rabbit model
A comparison of ProOsteon, DBX, and Collagraft in a rabbit model
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jbm.b.30541
复制
发表时间：
2006-11-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Hartsock, Langdon A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Leupold, John A.;Barfield, William R.;Hartsock, Langdon A.
许多骨移植替代品(BGS)已经被开发出来，并且已经可以在商业上获得。这些产品在大小、形状、骨传导性、骨诱导性和吸收动力学等特性的定制上有所不同。这些性能的差异增强可能会优化这些材料的性能，以适应不同的应用。BGSS为减少自体和/或同种异体骨的获取和使用提供了机会。本研究的目的是定量比较不同商业BGS材料在兔股骨缺损模型中的骨长入和生物降解量。将来自陶瓷(ProOsteon)、脱钙骨基质(DBX)和复合材料(Collagraft)三种材料的BGS分别植入12只成年新西兰大白兔双侧股骨髁部的柱状缺损处。将三种BGS材料和空白对照材料进行比较。移植后3个月取材进行放射学和组织学评价。组织形态计量学显示移植物材料吸收残留在指征缺损处。骨长入的大小是基于8位256密度测量模型来评估的。数据的组织形态计量学分析表明，三种BGS材料在骨吸收和骨长入大小方面存在统计学差异。经Wilcoxon检验，三组间内生差异有统计学意义(P=0.046)。陶瓷移植材料平均有47%的骨长入。兔基DBX材料显示出广泛的骨内生(35%)，而复合移植材料显示出显著的骨内生(56%)。正如预期的那样，对照组显示出最少的骨长入(29%)。当进行吸收比较时，Fisher‘s Exact检验产生统计学差异(P=0.0003)。理想的BGS材料应该是生物相容的，能够承受特定应用的局部负荷环境，与骨替代相一致地降解，并且同时具有骨诱导和骨传导。这是在动物模型中对三种商业BGS材料进行的活体、面对面的比较，比较了这些特性并展示了它们之间的差异，这可能对这些产品在人类应用中的使用起到指导作用。(C)2006年威利期刊公司。
Many bone graft substitutes (BGSs) have been developed and are commercially available. These products differ in the tailoring of their properties, including size, form, osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity, and resorption kinetics. Differential enhancement of these properties may optimize the performance of these materials for varying applications. BGSs offer an opportunity to lessen morbidity of harvesting and use of autogenous and/or allograft bone. The purpose of this study is to quantitatively compare the magnitude of bony ingrowth and biodegradation of different commercially available BGS materials in a rabbit femoral defect model. BGSs from each of three classes (ceramic (ProOsteon), demineralized bone matrix (DBX), and composite (Collagraft)) were implanted in cylindrical defects in bilateral femoral condyles of 12 adult New Zealand White rabbits. Each of the three BGS materials and the empty controls were compared. The specimens were harvested at 3 months postimplantation for radiographic and histologic evaluation. Histomorphometry yielded resorption of graft material remaining in the index defect. Magnitude of bony ingrowth was assessed based on an 8-bit 256 densitometry model. Histomorphometric analysis of the data demonstrated statistical differences in the resorption and magnitude of bony ingrowth of the three BGS materials. The three BGS were significantly different for ingrowth (P = 0.046) when using the Wilcoxon Test. The ceramic graft material averaged 47% bony ingrowth. Rabbit-based DBX material showed extensive osseous ingrowth (35%) and the composite graft material demonstrated significant bony ingrowth (56%). The control, as anticipated, showed the least amount of bony ingrowth (29%). Fisher's Exact Test yielded statistical differences (P = 0.0003) when comparisons for resorption were conducted. An ideal BGS material should be biocompatible, be able to withstand the local load environment for a given application, degrade in concert with bony replacement, and be both osteoinductive and osteoconductive. This in-vivo, head-to-head comparison of three commercially available BGS materials in an animal model compares these characteristics and demonstrates differences between them, which may act as a guide in the use of these products in human applications. (c) 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.