Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Local tissue effects of various barrier membranes in a rat subcutaneous model

  • Naenni, Nadja (Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich) ;
  • Lim, Hyun-Chang (Department of Periodontology, Periodontal-Implant Clinical Research Institute, Kyung Hee University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Strauss, Franz-Josef (Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich) ;
  • Jung, Ronald E. (Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich) ;
  • Hammerle, Christoph H.F. (Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich) ;
  • Thoma, Daniel S. (Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich)
  • Received : 2020.01.17
  • Accepted : 2020.04.20
  • Published : 2020.10.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the local tissue reactions associated with 3 different poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) prototype membranes and to compare them to the reactions associated with commercially available resorbable membranes in rats. Methods: Seven different membranes-3 synthetic PLGA prototypes (T1, T2, and T3) and 4 commercially available membranes (a PLGA membrane, a poly[lactic acid] membrane, a native collagen membrane, and a cross-linked collagen membrane)-were randomly inserted into 6 unconnected subcutaneous pouches in the backs of 42 rats. The animals were sacrificed at 4, 13, and 26 weeks. Descriptive histologic and histomorphometric assessments were performed to evaluate membrane degradation, visibility, tissue integration, tissue ingrowth, neovascularization, encapsulation, and inflammation. Means and standard deviations were calculated. Results: The histological analysis revealed complete integration and tissue ingrowth of PLGA prototype T1 at 26 weeks. In contrast, the T2 and T3 prototypes displayed slight to moderate integration and tissue ingrowth regardless of time point. The degradation patterns of the 3 synthetic prototypes were similar at 4 and 13 weeks, but differed at 26 weeks. T1 showed marked degradation at 26 weeks, whereas T2 and T3 displayed moderate degradation. Inflammatory cells were present in all 3 prototype membranes at all time points, and these membranes did not meaningfully differ from commercially available membranes with regard to the extent of inflammatory cell infiltration. Conclusions: The 3 PLGA prototypes, particularly T1, induced favorable tissue integration, exhibited a similar degradation rate to native collagen membranes, and elicited a similar inflammatory response to commercially available non-cross-linked resorbable membranes. The intensity of inflammation associated with degradable dental membranes appears to relate to their degradation kinetics, irrespective of their material composition.

Keywords

References

  1. Bornstein MM, Halbritter S, Harnisch H, Weber HP, Buser D. A retrospective analysis of patients referred for implant placement to a specialty clinic: indications, surgical procedures, and early failures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:1109-16.
  2. Khojasteh A, Kheiri L, Motamedian SR, Khoshkam V. Guided bone regeneration for the reconstruction of alveolar bone defects. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2017;7:263-77. https://doi.org/10.4103/ams.ams_76_17
  3. Hammerle CH, Jung RE. Bone augmentation by means of barrier membranes. Periodontol 2000 2003;33:36-53. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0906-6713.2003.03304.x
  4. Omar O, Elgali I, Dahlin C, Thomsen P. Barrier membranes: more than the barrier effect? J Clin Periodontol 2019;46 Suppl 21:103-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13068
  5. Dahlin C, Linde A, Gottlow J, Nyman S. Healing of bone defects by guided tissue regeneration. Plast Reconstr Surg 1988;81:672-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-198805000-00004
  6. Retzepi M, Donos N. Guided bone regeneration: biological principle and therapeutic applications. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:567-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01922.x
  7. Sanz M, Dahlin C, Apatzidou D, Artzi Z, Bozic D, Calciolari E, et al. Biomaterials and regenerative technologies used in bone regeneration in the craniomaxillofacial region: consensus report of group 2 of the 15th European Workshop on Periodontology on Bone Regeneration. J Clin Periodontol 2019;46 Suppl 21:82-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13123
  8. Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M. Clinical outcomes of GBR procedures to correct peri-implant dehiscences and fenestrations: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20 Suppl 4:113-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01781.x
  9. McAllister BS, Haghighat K. Bone augmentation techniques. J Periodontol 2007;78:377-96. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2007.060048
  10. Zitzmann NU, Naef R, Scharer P. Resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes in combination with Bio-Oss for guided bone regeneration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:844-52.
  11. Bunyaratavej P, Wang HL. Collagen membranes: a review. J Periodontol 2001;72:215-29. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.2.215
  12. Elgali I, Omar O, Dahlin C, Thomsen P. Guided bone regeneration: materials and biological mechanisms revisited. Eur J Oral Sci 2017;125:315-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12364
  13. Rothamel D, Schwarz F, Sager M, Herten M, Sculean A, Becker J. Biodegradation of differently cross-linked collagen membranes: an experimental study in the rat. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:369-78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01108.x
  14. Lee SW, Kim SG. Membranes for the guided bone regeneration. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 2014;36:239-46. https://doi.org/10.14402/jkamprs.2014.36.6.239
  15. Hutmacher D, Hurzeler MB, Schliephake H. A review of material properties of biodegradable and bioresorbable polymers and devices for GTR and GBR applications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:667-78.
  16. von Arx T, Broggini N, Jensen SS, Bornstein MM, Schenk RK, Buser D. Membrane durability and tissue response of different bioresorbable barrier membranes: a histologic study in the rabbit calvarium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:843-53.
  17. Thoma DS, Nanni N, Benic GI, Weber FE, Hammerle CH, Jung RE. Effect of platelet-derived growth factor-BB on tissue integration of cross-linked and non-cross-linked collagen matrices in a rat ectopic model. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:263-70.
  18. Makadia HK, Siegel SJ. Poly lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) as biodegradable controlled drug delivery carrier. Polymers (Basel) 2011;3:1377-97. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym3031377
  19. Hoornaert A, d'Arros C, Heymann MF, Layrolle P. Biocompatibility, resorption and biofunctionality of a new synthetic biodegradable membrane for guided bone regeneration. Biomed Mater 2016;11:045012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-6041/11/4/045012
  20. Rothamel D, Benner M, Fienitz T, Happe A, Kreppel M, Nickenig HJ, et al. Biodegradation pattern and tissue integration of native and cross-linked porcine collagen soft tissue augmentation matrices - an experimental study in the rat. Head Face Med 2014;10:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-160X-10-10
  21. Sela MN, Kohavi D, Krausz E, Steinberg D, Rosen G. Enzymatic degradation of collagen-guided tissue regeneration membranes by periodontal bacteria. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:263-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.140302.x
  22. Thoma DS, Bienz SP, Figuero E, Jung RE, Sanz-Martin I. Efficacy of lateral bone augmentation performed simultaneously with dental implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol 2019;46 Suppl 21:257-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13050
  23. Annen BM, Ramel CF, Hammerle CH, Jung RE. Use of a new cross-linked collagen membrane for the treatment of peri-implant dehiscence defects: a randomised controlled double-blinded clinical trial. Eur J Oral Implantology 2011;4:87-100.
  24. Lu L, Peter SJ, Lyman MD, Lai HL, Leite SM, Tamada JA, et al. In vitro and in vivo degradation of porous poly(DL-lactic-co-glycolic acid) foams. Biomaterials 2000;21:1837-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00047-8

Cited by

  1. Contact Angle and Cell Adhesion of Micro/Nano-Structured Poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) Membranes for Dental Regenerative Therapy vol.9, pp.11, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/dj9110124