Partner Magazine logo 17

logo 17 • CAMLOG Partner Magazine • March 2018 9 SCIENCE / CLINICAL RESEARCH sional framework for the formation of new bone. The properties of the framework in turn influence the success of the bone graft material (Fig. 2). • Autologous bone is still the gold standard but it is associated with higher costs and longer treatment times, and it requires an additional surgical procedure which can lead to increased donor site morbidity. Potential complications should be reduced [2,5]. • F urther aspects are the handling of the material – the easier the better for the clinician – as well as the cost efficiency. • A side from these factors, it is vital to bear in mind that bone augmentation surgery is often performed as part of a dental implant surgery. Therefore, the biological potential of the bone graft material should also be taken into account [1]. Biological interactions In two animal studies Li et al. [6] compared two bone graft materials of animal origin – isolated porcine cancellous bone (PCA/MinerOss® XP) (see Fig. 1) and commercially used carbonate apatite of bovine origin. The authors concluded that both materials in the intraoral and orthopedic bone defect functioned as an osteoconductive matrix that promoted bone regeneration. A study conducted by Roberts et al. [1] showed a correlation between the behavior of progenitor cells and the composition of the material. The study showed that the calciumphosphate ratio and cell attachment play a decisive role in new bone formation (Fig. 3). In another study, Yuen et al. [7] showed that the dense Mem-Lok® RCM Fig. 2: MinerOss® X: the bimodal pore structure. Fig. 3: Of the compared materials, MinerOss® X generates more new bone. 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Number (%) 0.1 1.0 Pore diameter (μm) Pore diameter (μm) 200 600 The capillary effect is created by the mesopores and leads to fast uptake of the material in the blood. The interconnected macropores enable the migration of cells and blood vessels and the integration of the particles, which allow effective osseointegration. A B C D E 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Bone volume (%)

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE0MzMw