Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2017-12-06, 11:14:19 | version 1.38.0
| industry Xenogeneic bone grafting materials Authors: Dr Mike Barbeck, Dr Ronald Unger, Prof. Dr Frank Witte, Prof. Dr Sabine Wenisch & Prof. Dr Dr Reiner Schnettler, Germany Literature Nowadays, a variety of bone substitutes are available for the clinical user. Interestingly, these materials sig- nificantly differ regarding their raw materials or man- ufacturing processes. As an alternative to autologous bone tissue (autograft), which is still applied as “gold standard” due to its extensive regenerative properties, bone substitutes from other natural sources become more and more relevant in regenerative dentistry. These bone substitute materials are either derived from human (allograft) or animal origin (xenograft). In case of these materials, the obtained bony extracellular matrix based on calcium phosphates should finally serve as bone substitute (Figs. 1–3). Based on the physicochemical similarity of this class of bone substitutes to the autologous bone tissue, it can be assumed that these materials are the ideal choice for osseous regeneration. Preferentially, bo- vine bone is used as source tissue in the daily dental practice, as in case of the two primarily applied bone substitute materials Bio-Oss™ and cerabone®. Safety aspects and purification processes For the clinical application of bone substitutes from natural sources it is inalienable to purify the donor tissue from immunogens to guarantee a re- Fig. 1 generation process without complications such as rejections or disease transmissions. To ensure the safe application of such bone substitute materials, different purification steps of the donor tissue are applied. The first step is the suitable selection of donor an- imals before the initiation of the purification pro- cess. Hence, for the production of Bio-Oss™ and cerabone® bovine femoral heads from registered suppliers located in Australia and New Zealand are processed as both countries are recognised to have a negligible BSE risk according to the World Organi- Fig. 1: (Ultra-)Structure of a cerabone® particle revealing the preservation of its trabecular natural architecture. Fig. 2: Surface pattern of a cerabone® particle showing the re- tention of the natural microstructure and the purification status based on cell-free osteocyte lacunae. Fig. 3: Cross-section of a cerabone® particle (µ-CT) revealing the reten- tion of the lamellar natural structure after completed purification of the xenogeneic bone graft. Fig. 2 Fig. 3 34 implants 3 2017