Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Physicochemical characterization of porcine bone-derived grafting material and comparison with bovine xenografts for dental applications

  • Lee, Jung Heon (School of Advanced Materials Science and Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Yi, Gyu Sung (School of Advanced Materials Science and Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Lee, Jin Woong (School of Advanced Materials Science and Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Kim, Deug Joong (School of Advanced Materials Science and Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University)
  • Received : 2017.11.01
  • Accepted : 2017.12.22
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The physicochemical properties of a xenograft are very important because they strongly influence the bone regeneration capabilities of the graft material. Even though porcine xenografts have many advantages, only a few porcine xenografts are commercially available, and most of their physicochemical characteristics have yet to be reported. Thus, in this work we aimed to investigate the physicochemical characteristics of a porcine bone grafting material and compare them with those of 2 commercially available bovine xenografts to assess the potential of xenogenic porcine bone graft materials for dental applications. Methods: We used various characterization techniques, such as scanning electron microscopy, the Brunauer-Emmett-Teller adsorption method, atomic force microscopy, Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, and others, to compare the physicochemical properties of xenografts of different origins. Results: The porcine bone grafting material had relatively high porosity (78.4%) and a large average specific surface area (SSA; $69.9m^2/g$), with high surface roughness (10-point average roughness, $4.47{\mu}m$) and sub-100-nm hydroxyapatite crystals on the surface. Moreover, this material presented a significant fraction of sub-100-nm pores, with negligible amounts of residual organic substances. Apart from some minor differences, the overall characteristics of the porcine bone grafting material were very similar to those of one of the bovine bone grafting material. However, many of these morphostructural properties were significantly different from the other bovine bone grafting material, which exhibited relatively smooth surface morphology with a porosity of 62.0% and an average SSA of $0.5m^2/g$. Conclusions: Considering that both bovine bone grafting materials have been successfully used in oral surgery applications in the last few decades, this work shows that the porcinederived grafting material possesses most of the key physiochemical characteristics required for its application as a highly efficient xenograft material for bone replacement.

Keywords

References

  1. Park SY, Kim KI, Park SP, Lee JH, Jung HS. Aspartic acid-assisted synthesis of multifunctional strontium-substituted hydroxyapatite microspheres. Cryst Growth Des 2016;16:4318-26. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.cgd.6b00420
  2. Kim DH, Kim KI, Yoon S, Kim HJ, Ahn JS, Jun SH, et al. Dental hetero-graft materials with nano hydroxyapatite surface treatment. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2015;15:7942-9. https://doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2015.11197
  3. Richardson CR, Mellonig JT, Brunsvold MA, McDonnell HT, Cochran DL. Clinical evaluation of Bio-$Oss^{(R)}$: a bovine-derived xenograft for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects in humans. J Clin Periodontol 1999;26:421-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.1999.260702.x
  4. Tadic D, Epple M. A thorough physicochemical characterisation of 14 calcium phosphate-based bone substitution materials in comparison to natural bone. Biomaterials 2004;25:987-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00621-5
  5. Holzer A, Pietschmann MF, Rosl C, Hentschel M, Betz O, Matsuura M, et al. The interrelation of trabecular microstructural parameters of the greater tubercle measured for different species. J Orthop Res 2012;30:429-34. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.21525
  6. Lorenzen E, Follmann F, Jungersen G, Agerholm JS. A review of the human vs. porcine female genital tract and associated immune system in the perspective of using minipigs as a model of human genital Chlamydia infection. Vet Res 2015;46:116. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13567-015-0241-9
  7. Salamanca E, Lee WF, Lin CY, Huang HM, Lin CT, Feng SW, et al. A novel porcine graft for regeneration of bone defects. Materials (Basel) 2015;8:2523-36. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma8052523
  8. Ramirez-Fernandez M, Calvo-Guirado JL, Delgado-Ruiz RA, Mate-Sanchez del Val JE, Vicente-Ortega V, Meseguer-Olmos L. Bone response to hydroxyapatites with open porosity of animal origin (porcine [$OsteoBiol^{(R)}$mp3] and bovine [$Endobon^{(R)}$]): a radiological and histomorphometric study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22:767-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02058.x
  9. Go A, Kim SE, Shim KM, Lee SM, Choi SH, Son JS, et al. Osteogenic effect of low-temperature-heated porcine bone particles in a rat calvarial defect model. J Biomed Mater Res A 2014;102:3609-17. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.35022
  10. Mochalov KE, Efimov AE, Bobrovsky A, Agapov II, Chistyakov AA, Oleinikov V, et al. Combined scanning probe nanotomography and optical microspectroscopy: a correlative technique for 3D characterization of nanomaterials. ACS Nano 2013;7:8953-62. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn403448p
  11. Mochalov KE, Efimov AE, Oleinikov VA, Nabiev I. High-resolution scanning near-field optical nanotomography: a technique for 3D multimodal nanoscale characterization of nano-biophotonic materials. Phys Procedia 2015;73:168-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2015.09.148
  12. Mariotti F, Tome D, Mirand PP. Converting nitrogen into protein--beyond 6.25 and Jones' factors. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2008;48:177-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408390701279749
  13. Renders GA, Mulder L, van Ruijven LJ, van Eijden TM. Porosity of human mandibular condylar bone. J Anat 2007;210:239-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7580.2007.00693.x
  14. Hing KA, Annaz B, Saeed S, Revell PA, Buckland T. Microporosity enhances bioactivity of synthetic bone graft substitutes. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2005;16:467-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-005-6988-1
  15. Lee DS, Pai Y, Chang S. Physicochemical characterization of $InterOss^{(R)}$ and Bio-$Oss^{(R)}$ anorganic bovine bone grafting material for oral surgery: a comparative study. Mater Chem Phys 2014;146:99-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2014.03.004
  16. Lowell S, Shields JE. Powder surface area and porosity. 3rd ed. New York (NY): Springers; 1991.
  17. Webb PA, Orr C. Analytical methods in fine particle technology. Norcross (GA): Micromeritics Instrument Corporation; 1997.
  18. Lee H, Lee W, Lee JH, Yoon DS. Surface potential analysis of nanoscale biomaterials and devices using kelvin probe force microscopy. J Nanomater 2016;2016:4209130.
  19. Figueiredo M, Henriques J, Martins G, Guerra F, Judas F, Figueiredo H. Physicochemical characterization of biomaterials commonly used in dentistry as bone substitutes--comparison with human bone. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2010;92:409-19.
  20. LeGeros RZ. Calcium phosphates in oral biology and medicine. Monogr Oral Sci 1991;15:1-201.
  21. Berzina-Cimdina L, Borodajenko N. Research of calcium phosphates using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. London: INTECH Open Access Publisher; 2012.
  22. Rivera-Munoz EM. Hydroxyapatite-based materials: synthesis and characterization. In: Fazel-Rezai R, editor. Biomedical engineering: frontiers and challenges. London: INTECH Open Access Publisher; 2011. Chapter 4.
  23. Figueiredo MM, Gamelas JA, Martins AG. Characterization of bone and bone-based graft materials using FTIR spectroscopy. In: Theophanides T, editor. Infrared spectroscopy: life and biomedical sciences. London: INTECH Open Access Publisher; 2012. Chapter 18.
  24. Saez-Plaza P, Navas MJ, Wybraniec S, Michalowski T, Asuero AG. An overview of the Kjeldahl method of nitrogen determination. Part II. Sample preparation, working scale, instrumental finish, and quality control. Crit Rev Anal Chem 2013;43:224-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347.2012.751787
  25. Cohen SA, Strydom DJ. Amino acid analysis utilizing phenylisothiocyanate derivatives. Anal Biochem 1988;174:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(88)90512-X
  26. Crabb JW, West KA, Dodson WS, Hulmes JD. Amino acid analysis. Curr Protoc Protein Sci 2001;Chapter 11:Unit 11.9.
  27. Cowin SC. Bone mechanics. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 1989.
  28. da Cruz AC, Pochapski MT, Daher JB, da Silva JC, Pilatti GL, Santos FA. Physico-chemical characterization and biocompatibility evaluation of hydroxyapatites. J Oral Sci 2006;48:219-26. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.48.219
  29. Murugan R, Ramakrishna S, Panduranga Rao K. Nanoporous hydroxy-carbonate apatite scaffold made of natural bone. Mater Lett 2006;60:2844-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2006.01.104
  30. Webster TJ, Ergun C, Doremus RH, Siegel RW, Bizios R. Enhanced functions of osteoblasts on nanophase ceramics. Biomaterials 2000;21:1803-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00075-2
  31. Li X, van Blitterswijk CA, Feng Q, Cui F, Watari F. The effect of calcium phosphate microstructure on bone-related cells in vitro. Biomaterials 2008;29:3306-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.04.039
  32. Kubies D, Himmlova L, Riedel T, Chanova E, Balik K, Douderova M, et al. The interaction of osteoblasts with bone-implant materials: 1. The effect of physicochemical surface properties of implant materials. Physiol Res 2011;60:95-111.
  33. Rupp F, Gittens RA, Scheideler L, Marmur A, Boyan BD, Schwartz Z, et al. A review on the wettability of dental implant surfaces I: theoretical and experimental aspects. Acta Biomater 2014;10:2894-906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2014.02.040

Cited by

  1. A Decellularized Porcine Xenograft-Derived Bone Scaffold for Clinical Use as a Bone Graft Substitute: A Critical Evaluation of Processing and Structure vol.9, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb9030045
  2. Synthesis and Characterization of Calcium Hydroxide from Indonesian Limestone as Endodontic Intracanal Medicament vol.782, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/kem.782.268
  3. Single-Chain Atomic Crystals as Extracellular Matrix-Mimicking Material with Exceptional Biocompatibility and Bioactivity vol.18, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b03201
  4. Current Stage of Marine Ceramic Grafts for 3D Bone Tissue Regeneration vol.17, pp.8, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/md17080471
  5. Comparison of Bone Regeneration between Porcine-Derived and Bovine-Derived Xenografts in Rat Calvarial Defects: A Non-Inferiority Study vol.12, pp.20, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12203412
  6. Xenotransplantation of decellularized pig heart valves—Regulatory aspects in Europe vol.27, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/xen.12609
  7. Adjunctive use of enamel matrix derivatives to porcine‐derived xenograft for the treatment of one‐wall intrabony defects: Two‐year longitudinal results of a randomized controlled vol.91, pp.7, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/jper.19-0432
  8. Clinical Case Employing Two Different Biomaterials in Bone Regeneration vol.10, pp.13, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/app10134516
  9. Evaluation and comparison of histologic changes and implant survival in extraction sites immediately grafted with two different xenografts: A randomized clinical pilot study vol.31, pp.9, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13626
  10. Comparative study of impact of animal source on physical, structural, and biological properties of bone xenograft vol.27, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/xen.12628
  11. New bone ingrowth into β-TCP/HA graft activated with argon plasma: a histomorphometric study on sinus lifting in rabbits vol.6, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-00236-4
  12. The Effect of Different Socket Types on Implant Therapy While Using Flapless Ridge Preservation vol.11, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11030970
  13. In Vivo Analysis of the Biocompatibility and Bone Healing Capacity of a Novel Bone Grafting Material Combined with Hyaluronic Acid vol.22, pp.9, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22094818
  14. Scaffold-Type Structure Dental Ceramics with Different Compositions Evaluated through Physicochemical Characteristics and Biosecurity Profiles vol.14, pp.9, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14092266
  15. Development and physicochemical characterization of novel porous phosphate glass bone graft substitute and in vitro comparison with xenograft vol.32, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-021-06532-8
  16. Biomaterials for Periodontal and Peri-Implant Regeneration vol.14, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14123319
  17. Bio-essential Inorganic Molecular Nanowires as a Bioactive Muscle Extracellular-Matrix-Mimicking Material vol.13, pp.33, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c12440
  18. Critical-size Defect Augmentation Using Sintered and Non-Sintered Bovine Bone Matrix – An Experimental Controlled Study in Minipigs vol.79, pp.9, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2021.03.025
  19. Sinus Mucosa Thinning and Perforations after Sinus Lifting Performed with Different Xenografts: A Histological Analysis in Rabbits vol.10, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/dj10010002