Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2015-11-17, 15:11:47 | version 1.38.0
Volume 1 | Issue 1/2015 23Journal of Oral Science & Rehabilitation β-TCP b ov in e b iph a s ic b iom a teria l i ncre ase s bo ne f o rmati o n i n do g mo de l HA/β-TCP scaffold produced effective defect closure and improved newboneformation.The material was also very stable. These results agree with research carried out by Kruse et al., who created noncritical-size defects in rabbit calvarias, filling them with three different ma- terials: synthetic HA/silica oxide-based test granules, xenogenic HA-based granules, and synthetic HA/silica oxide-based granules.25 It was found that the incorporation of silica into the HA provided comparable results to a stan- dard xenogenic bovine mineralinterms ofbone formation and defect bridging in noncritical- size defects. The residual material in the present study was higher in Test B, a finding that agrees with several other studies that have affirmed that incorporating calcium silicate into β-TCP ce- ment increases the material’s stability and mechanical properties. As demonstrated by Velasquez et al., the addition of silicon to the β-TCP ceramic structure enhanced its proper- ties by reducing its resorption rate and thus in- creasing the material’s stability during the bone formation processes.12 Similar results were obtained by Wang et al.,2 who suggest that 50 or 80% silicon could promote bone re- generation by stimulating osteogenesis, angio- genesis, and the proliferation and differentia- tion of osteoblast-like cells.26 The present study found connective tissue present in higher percentages in the control group in comparison with Tests A and B, which agrees with research carried out by De Aza et al., who implanted β-TCP and β-TCP doped with3 wt%dicalciumsilicateceramic(β-TCPss)in critical-size defects in rabbit tibiae.14 They observed organized collagen fibrils at the β-TCPss–bone interface for TCP doped with 3 wt% dicalcium silicate ceramic after four Figs. 4a–c Histomorphometric comparison at eight weeks between all groups. Control defect: Bone formation was observed only at the defect walls, and incomplete closure of the defect was observed (a). Test A: Bone formation was observed around the periphery of the granules; at the basal zone, new cortical formation supported by the granules was observed (b). Test B: A reduction in the graft volume was observed, with increased bone formation around and inside the granules (c). Figs. 4d–f Histomorphometric comparison at eight and 12 weeks between all groups. Control defect: Bone formation was observed only at the defect walls, and complete closure of the defect was not observed (d). Test A: Bone formation was observed around the periphery of and inside the granules (e). Test B: A reduction in the graft volume was observed, with increased bone formation around and inside the granules (f). Figs. 4a–c Figs. 4d–f d e f a b c