Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2004 Oct;15(5):589-97.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01038.x.

Tissue-engineered injectable bone regeneration for osseointegrated dental implants

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Tissue-engineered injectable bone regeneration for osseointegrated dental implants

Yoichi Yamada et al. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004 Oct.

Abstract

The present study investigated a correlation between osseointegration in dental implants and an injectable tissue-engineered bone, using mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Initially, the teeth in the mandible region were extracted and the healing period was 1 month. Bone defects on both sides of the mandible were prepared with a trephine bar. The defects were implanted with graft materials as follows: PRP, dog MSCs (dMSCs), and PRP, autogenous particulate cancellous bone and marrow (PCBM), and control (defect only). Two months later, the animals were evaluated by histology, and at the same time dental implants were installed. Two months later, the animals were sacrificed and nondecalcified sections were evaluated histologically and histometrically. According to the histological observations, the dMSCs/PRP group had well-formed mature bone and neovascularization, compared with the control (defect only) and PRP groups, as was the same for the PCBM group. A higher marginal bone level was observed around implants with PRP, PCBM, and dMSCs/PRP compared with the control. Furthermore, the values describing the amount of bone-implant contact (BIC) at the bone/implant interface were significantly different between the PRP, PCBM, dMSCs/PRP, and control groups. Significant differences were also found between the dMSCs/PRP and control groups in bone density. The findings of this experimental study indicate that the use of a mixture of dMSCs/PRP results in good results such as the amount of BIC and bone density comparable with that achieved by PCBM.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources