Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10090230 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/202098 |
Resumo: | Guided bone regeneration was studied to establish protocols and develop new biomaterials that revealed satisfactory results. The present study aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficiency of the bacterial cellulose membrane (Nanoskin®) and collagen membrane Bio-Gide® in the bone repair of 8-mm critical size defects in rat calvaria. Seventy-two adult male rats were divided into three experimental groups (n = 24): the CG—membrane-free control group (only blood clot, negative control), BG—porcine collagen membrane group (Bio-Guide®, positive control), and BC—bacterial cellulose membrane group (experimental group). The comparison periods were 7, 15, 30, and 60 days postoperatively. Histological, histometric, and immunohistochemical analyses were performed. The quantitative data were subjected to 2-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-test, and p < 0.05 was considered significant. At 30 and 60 days postoperatively, the BG group showed more healing of the surgical wound than the other groups, with a high amount of newly formed bone (p < 0.001), while the BC group showed mature connective tissue filling the defect. The inflammatory cell count at postoperative days 7 and 15 was higher in the BC group than in the BG group (Tukey’s test, p = 0.006). At postoperative days 30 and 60, the area of new bone formed was greater in the BG group than in the other groups (p < 0.001). Immunohistochemical analysis showed moderate and intense immunolabeling of osteocalcin and osteopontin at postoperative day 60 in the BG and BC groups. Thus, despite the promising application of the BC membrane in soft-tissue repair, it did not induce bone repair in rat calvaria. |
id |
UNSP_2375141dafc62c89018eff63be76c819 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/202098 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property?BiomaterialsCelluloseXenograftsGuided bone regeneration was studied to establish protocols and develop new biomaterials that revealed satisfactory results. The present study aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficiency of the bacterial cellulose membrane (Nanoskin®) and collagen membrane Bio-Gide® in the bone repair of 8-mm critical size defects in rat calvaria. Seventy-two adult male rats were divided into three experimental groups (n = 24): the CG—membrane-free control group (only blood clot, negative control), BG—porcine collagen membrane group (Bio-Guide®, positive control), and BC—bacterial cellulose membrane group (experimental group). The comparison periods were 7, 15, 30, and 60 days postoperatively. Histological, histometric, and immunohistochemical analyses were performed. The quantitative data were subjected to 2-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-test, and p < 0.05 was considered significant. At 30 and 60 days postoperatively, the BG group showed more healing of the surgical wound than the other groups, with a high amount of newly formed bone (p < 0.001), while the BC group showed mature connective tissue filling the defect. The inflammatory cell count at postoperative days 7 and 15 was higher in the BC group than in the BG group (Tukey’s test, p = 0.006). At postoperative days 30 and 60, the area of new bone formed was greater in the BG group than in the other groups (p < 0.001). Immunohistochemical analysis showed moderate and intense immunolabeling of osteocalcin and osteopontin at postoperative day 60 in the BG and BC groups. Thus, despite the promising application of the BC membrane in soft-tissue repair, it did not induce bone repair in rat calvaria.Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Department of Diagnosis and Surgery São Paulo State University UNESP School of DentistryDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery College of Dentistry Ibb UniversityDepartment of Animal Clinic Surgery and Reproduction São Paulo State University UNESP School of Veterinary MedicineDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery São Paulo State University UNESP School of DentistryDepartment of Animal Clinic Surgery and Reproduction São Paulo State University UNESP School of Veterinary MedicineFAPESP: 2015/23790-2Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Ibb UniversityBassi, Ana Paula Farnezi [UNESP]Bizelli, Vinícius Ferreira [UNESP]de Mendes Brasil, Leticia Freitas [UNESP]Pereira, Járede Carvalho [UNESP]Al-Sharani, Hesham MohammedMomesso, Gustavo Antonio Correa [UNESP]Faverani, Leonardo P. [UNESP]Lucas, Flavia de Almeida [UNESP]2020-12-12T02:49:43Z2020-12-12T02:49:43Z2020-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article1-15http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10090230Membranes, v. 10, n. 9, p. 1-15, 2020.2077-0375http://hdl.handle.net/11449/20209810.3390/membranes100902302-s2.0-85090838671Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengMembranesinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-09-04T18:03:22Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/202098Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestrepositoriounesp@unesp.bropendoar:29462024-09-04T18:03:22Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? |
title |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? |
spellingShingle |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? Bassi, Ana Paula Farnezi [UNESP] Biomaterials Cellulose Xenografts |
title_short |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? |
title_full |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? |
title_fullStr |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? |
title_sort |
Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property? |
author |
Bassi, Ana Paula Farnezi [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Bassi, Ana Paula Farnezi [UNESP] Bizelli, Vinícius Ferreira [UNESP] de Mendes Brasil, Leticia Freitas [UNESP] Pereira, Járede Carvalho [UNESP] Al-Sharani, Hesham Mohammed Momesso, Gustavo Antonio Correa [UNESP] Faverani, Leonardo P. [UNESP] Lucas, Flavia de Almeida [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Bizelli, Vinícius Ferreira [UNESP] de Mendes Brasil, Leticia Freitas [UNESP] Pereira, Járede Carvalho [UNESP] Al-Sharani, Hesham Mohammed Momesso, Gustavo Antonio Correa [UNESP] Faverani, Leonardo P. [UNESP] Lucas, Flavia de Almeida [UNESP] |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) Ibb University |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Bassi, Ana Paula Farnezi [UNESP] Bizelli, Vinícius Ferreira [UNESP] de Mendes Brasil, Leticia Freitas [UNESP] Pereira, Járede Carvalho [UNESP] Al-Sharani, Hesham Mohammed Momesso, Gustavo Antonio Correa [UNESP] Faverani, Leonardo P. [UNESP] Lucas, Flavia de Almeida [UNESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Biomaterials Cellulose Xenografts |
topic |
Biomaterials Cellulose Xenografts |
description |
Guided bone regeneration was studied to establish protocols and develop new biomaterials that revealed satisfactory results. The present study aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficiency of the bacterial cellulose membrane (Nanoskin®) and collagen membrane Bio-Gide® in the bone repair of 8-mm critical size defects in rat calvaria. Seventy-two adult male rats were divided into three experimental groups (n = 24): the CG—membrane-free control group (only blood clot, negative control), BG—porcine collagen membrane group (Bio-Guide®, positive control), and BC—bacterial cellulose membrane group (experimental group). The comparison periods were 7, 15, 30, and 60 days postoperatively. Histological, histometric, and immunohistochemical analyses were performed. The quantitative data were subjected to 2-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-test, and p < 0.05 was considered significant. At 30 and 60 days postoperatively, the BG group showed more healing of the surgical wound than the other groups, with a high amount of newly formed bone (p < 0.001), while the BC group showed mature connective tissue filling the defect. The inflammatory cell count at postoperative days 7 and 15 was higher in the BC group than in the BG group (Tukey’s test, p = 0.006). At postoperative days 30 and 60, the area of new bone formed was greater in the BG group than in the other groups (p < 0.001). Immunohistochemical analysis showed moderate and intense immunolabeling of osteocalcin and osteopontin at postoperative day 60 in the BG and BC groups. Thus, despite the promising application of the BC membrane in soft-tissue repair, it did not induce bone repair in rat calvaria. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-12-12T02:49:43Z 2020-12-12T02:49:43Z 2020-09-01 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10090230 Membranes, v. 10, n. 9, p. 1-15, 2020. 2077-0375 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/202098 10.3390/membranes10090230 2-s2.0-85090838671 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10090230 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/202098 |
identifier_str_mv |
Membranes, v. 10, n. 9, p. 1-15, 2020. 2077-0375 10.3390/membranes10090230 2-s2.0-85090838671 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Membranes |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
1-15 |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositoriounesp@unesp.br |
_version_ |
1810021357481623552 |