Is the bacterial cellulose membrane feasible for osteopromotive property?

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Bassi, Ana Paula Farnezi [UNESP]
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: 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]
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