Journal of Biomedical Materials Research · 1999 · 24 citations · 0 references
Tissue EngineeringEngineeringBone RepairBioceramic MaterialsBiomedical EngineeringOsteoporosisOrthopaedic SurgeryBioglassesOrthopaedic BiomaterialsSynthetic Bone SubstituteRegenerative BiomaterialsBone RemodelingBioceramicVarious SizesTe DcpdMaterials ScienceGranule SizesBone DensityBone MetabolismGranule DiameterMicrostructureBioceramicsHard Tissue EngineeringMedicineBiomaterialsBiocompatible Material
Bioceramics comprise inert, surface‑bioactive, and resorbable bioactive types such as alumina, hydroxyapatite, Bioglass®, α‑TCP, β‑TCP, and various calcium phosphate compounds. The study aimed to determine the optimal bioceramic material and granule diameter for bone grafting by implanting them into 6‑mm femoral condyle holes in mature Japanese white rabbits. Granules were prepared in three size ranges: 100–300 µm, 10 µm, and 1–3 µm. Bone growth varied with ceramic type and granule size; 45S5 Bioglass® promoted faster bone proliferation than synthetic HAp, resorbable ceramics showed a resorption hierarchy with low‑crystalline HAp and OCP > TeCP/Te DCPD/Te DCPA > α‑TCP/β.
Various bioceramic materials were implanted into 6-mm-diameter holes made in the femoral condyles of mature Japanese white rabbits using different-sized granules to find an optimal material and granule diameter for use as a bone graft. Bioceramics include a bioinert ceramic (Alumina), surface-bioactive ceramics [hydroxyapatite (HAp) and Bioglass®], and resorbable bioactive ceramics [αtricalcium phosphate (α-TCP), β-TCP, tetracalcium phosphate (TeCP), Te · DCPD, Te · DCPA, and low-crystalline HAp]. Granule sizes were 100–300, 10, and 1–3 μm. Bone growth behavior varied with the kind of bioceramic and the size used. For surface-bioactive ceramics, 45S5 Bioglass® led to more rapid bone proliferation than synthetic HAp. In resorbable bioactive ceramics, the order of resorption was: low-crystalline HAp and OCP > TeCP, Te DCPD, Te DCPA > α-TCP, β-TCP. In terms of biocompatibility, α-TCP was better than β-TCP. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res, 44, 31–43, 1999.