Abstract
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) using a porcine-derived collagen matrix (Mucograft [MG], Geistlich) has not yet been reported. The aim of this histologic and biomechanical study was to compare the efficacy of MG versus resorbable collagen membranes (RCMs) in facilitating GBR around standardized rat calvarial defects. Forty female Wistar albino rats with a mean age and weight of 6 to 9 weeks and 250 to 300 g, respectively, were used. With the rats under general anesthesia, the skin over the calvaria was exposed using a full-thickness flap. A 4.6-mm-diameter standardized calvarial defect was created in the left parietal bone. For treatment, the rats were randomly divided into four groups (n = 10 per group): (1) MG group: the defect was covered with MG; (2) RCM group: the defect was covered with an RCM; (3) MG + bone group: the defect was filled with bone graft particles and covered by MG; and (4) RCM + bone group: the defect was filled with bone graft particles and covered by an RCM. Primary closure was achieved using interrupted resorbable sutures. The animals were sacrificed at 8 weeks after the surgical procedures. Qualitative histologic analysis and biomechanical assessment to identify hardness and elastic modulus of newly formed bone (NFB) were performed. Collected data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance. Histologic findings revealed NFB with fibrous connective tissue in all groups. The quantity of NFB was highest in the RCM + bone group. Statistically significant differences in the hardness (F = 567.69, dfN = 3, dfD = 36, P < .001) and elastic modulus (F = 294.19, dfN = 3, dfD = 36, P < .001) of NFB were found between the groups. Although the RCM + bone group had the highest mean ± standard deviation (SD) hardness of NFB (531.4 ± 24.9 MPa), the RCM group had the highest mean ± SD elastic modulus of NFB (18.63 ± 1.89 GPa). The present study demonstrated that RCMs are better than MG at enhancing new bone formation in standardized rat calvarial defects when used along with mineralized particulate graft material.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: The International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
