17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Is the Bacterial Cellulose Membrane Feasible for Osteopromotive Property?

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          In vivo biocompatibility of bacterial cellulose.

          The biocompatibility of a scaffold for tissue engineered constructs is essential for the outcome. Bacterial cellulose (BC) consists of completely pure cellulose nanofibrils synthesized by Acetobacter xylinum. BC has high mechanical strength and can be shaped into three-dimensional structures. Cellulose-based materials induce negligible foreign body and inflammatory responses and are considered as biocompatible. The in vivo biocompatibility of BC has never been evaluated systematically. Thus, in the development of tissue engineered constructs with a BC scaffold, it is necessary to evaluate the in vivo biocompatibility. BC was implanted subcutaneously in rats for 1, 4, and 12 weeks. The implants were evaluated in aspects of chronic inflammation, foreign body responses, cell ingrowth, and angiogenesis, using histology, immunohistochemistry, and electron microscopy. There were no macroscopic signs of inflammation around the implants. There were no microscopic signs of inflammation either (i.e., a high number of small cells around the implants or the blood vessels). No fibrotic capsule or giant cells were present. Fibroblasts infiltrated BC, which was well integrated into the host tissue, and did not elicit any chronic inflammatory reactions. The biocompatibility of BC is good and the material has potential to be used as a scaffold in tissue engineering.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Horizontal ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts and the guided bone regeneration technique with collagen membranes: a clinical study with 42 patients.

            To analyze the clinical outcome of horizontal ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts covered with an organic bovine bone mineral (ABBM) and a bioabsorbable collagen membrane.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A systematic review on the critical size defect model.

              To systematically review the literature data regarding the critical size defect (CSD) in adult rat calvaria and to determine which defect dimensions could be considered as being critical size.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Membranes (Basel)
                Membranes (Basel)
                membranes
                Membranes
                MDPI
                2077-0375
                12 September 2020
                September 2020
                : 10
                : 9
                : 230
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Diagnosis and Surgery, São Paulo State University, UNESP, School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, São Paulo 16015-050, Brazil; viniciusbizelli@ 123456gmail.com (V.F.B.); leticiafmbr@ 123456gmail.com (L.F.d.M.B.); institutojarede@ 123456gmail.com (J.C.P.); gustavomomesso@ 123456gmail.com (G.A.C.M.); leonardo.faverani@ 123456unesp.br (L.P.F.)
                [2 ]Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Ibb University, Ibb 16015-050, Yemen; hishamm2010@ 123456live.com
                [3 ]Department of Animal Clinic, Surgery and Reproduction, São Paulo State University, UNESP, School of Veterinary Medicine, Araçatuba, São Paulo 16050-698, Brazil; flavia.lucas@ 123456unesp.br
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: ana.bassi@ 123456unesp.br ; Tel.: +55-18-36363242
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0031-4953
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9576-2408
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2249-3048
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5526-8528
                Article
                membranes-10-00230
                10.3390/membranes10090230
                7558580
                32932731
                f46a1cc1-c150-4970-b2f8-3b2bb6737151
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 09 August 2020
                : 07 September 2020
                Categories
                Article

                biomaterials,xenografts,cellulose
                biomaterials, xenografts, cellulose

                Comments

                Comment on this article