Initial in-vivo evaluation of glass-ionomer cements for use as alveolar bone substitutes

1991 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 295-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
I.M. Brook ◽  
G.T. Craig ◽  
D.J. Lamb
Keyword(s):  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Bone Substitutes ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
In Vivo Evaluation

scholarly journals In Vivo Evaluation of 3D-Printed Polycaprolactone Scaffold Implantation Combined with β-TCP Powder for Alveolar Bone Augmentation in a Beagle Defect Model

Materials ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Su Park ◽  
Hyo-Jung Lee ◽  
Keun-Suh Kim ◽  
Sang Lee ◽  
Jung-Tae Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Defect Model ◽  
In Vivo Evaluation ◽  
3D Printed

scholarly journals Recent advances in the use of glass ionomers: bone substitutes

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-207
Author(s):  
Luiz Antonio SALATA ◽  
Cássio Edvard SVERZUT ◽  
Samuel Porfírio XAVIER
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Application ◽  
Surgical Procedures ◽  
Bone Substitutes ◽  
Biological Properties ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Minor Surgical Procedures ◽  
Recent Advances

The purpose of this study is to update the reader upon the latest scientific trends concerning the use of glass ionomer cements (GICs). These materials which have been found of large clinical application in dentistry worldwide, have recently been successfully tested as bone substitutes in minor surgical procedures. The new perspectives of the use of glass ionomer as an osteoconductive material is analysed in the light of its biological properties as a restorative material.

scholarly journals The possibility of healing alveolar bone defects with simvastatin thermosensitive gel: in vitro/in vivo evaluation

2018 ◽  
Vol Volume 12 ◽  
pp. 1997-2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Ruan ◽  
Youcheng Yu ◽  
Xuehua Guo ◽  
Qian Jiang ◽  
Ying Luo
Keyword(s):  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
In Vivo Evaluation ◽  
Thermosensitive Gel

In vitro cytotoxicity and in vivo biocompatibility of contemporary resin-modified glass-ionomer cements

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. 838-844 ◽  
Author(s):  
P SOUZA ◽  
A ARANHA ◽  
J HEBLING ◽  
E GIRO ◽  
C COSTA
Keyword(s):  
In Vitro Cytotoxicity ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer

A Comparison of the in vitro Cytotoxicity of Two Glass-ionomer Cements

1983 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 769-773 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.D. Meryon ◽  
P.G. Stephens ◽  
R.M. Browne
Keyword(s):  
Time Scale ◽  
In Vitro Cytotoxicity ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Cavity System

The in vitro cytotoxicity of two glass-ionomer cements - ASPA and ChemBond - was compared using a model cavity system which simulates the in vivo situation. Both materials were cytotoxic to fibroblasts and macrophages, although differences were observed in the time scale and magnitude of the response elicited.

IN VIVO EVALUATION OF A NEW β-TRICALCIUM PHOSPHATE BONE SUBSTITUTE IN A RABBIT FEMUR DEFECT MODEL

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (03) ◽  
pp. 1550028 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kam-Kong Chan ◽  
Chia-Hsien Chen ◽  
Lien-Chen Wu ◽  
Yi-Jie Kuo ◽  
Chun-Jen Liao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Graft ◽  
Tricalcium Phosphate ◽  
Bone Substitute ◽  
Zealand White Rabbit ◽  
Bone Substitutes ◽  
Bone Graft Substitute ◽  
Defect Model ◽  
In Vivo Evaluation ◽  
Rabbit Femur

Calcium phosphate ceramics, of a similar composition to that of mineral bone, and which possess the properties of bioactivity and osteoconductivity, have been widely used as substitutes for bone graft in orthopedic, plastic and craniofacial surgeries. A synthetic β-tricalcium phosphate, Osteocera™, a recently developed bone graft substitute, has been used in this study. To evaluate the affinity and efficacy of Osteocera™ as bone defect implant, we used a New Zealand white rabbit femur defect model to test the osteoconductivity of this new bone substitute. Alternative commercially available bone substitutes, Triosite® and ProOsteon500, were used as the control materials. These three bone substitutes show good biocompatibility, and no abnormal inflammation either infection was seen at the implantation sites. In the histological and histomorphometric images, newly formed bone grew into the peripheral pores in the bone substitutes. After six months implantation, the volume of bone formation was found to be 20.5 ± 5.2%, 29.8 ± 6.5% and 75.5 ± 4.9% of the potential total cavity offered by ProOsteon500, Triosite® and Osteocera™, respectively. The newly formed bone area within the femur defect section for Osteocera™ was significantly larger than ProOsteon500 and Triosite®. We concluded that Osteocera™ shows better bioresorbability, biocompatibility and osteoconductivity in the rabbit femur defect model.

Adhesion of Polycarboxylate-based Dental Cements to Enamel: An in vivo Study

1986 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 885-887 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Jemt ◽  
P.A. Stålblad ◽  
G. Øilo
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Tensile Force ◽  
Test Method ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Adhesive Failure ◽  
Cohesive Failure ◽  
The Mean

The bond strength of two polycarboxylate and two glass ionomer cements to enamel in vivo has been measured by a tensile test method. The four cements were used to cement small stainless steel cylinders onto the facial surfaces of 11 and 21. The cylinders were removed by a tensile force applied by a handpiece containing a semi-conductor sensory unit. The results showed that all cements gave two sets of bond strength values, either a good bond corresponding to a cohesive failure, or a weak bond corresponding to an adhesive failure. The mean bond strength values were lower than those recorded in vitro, and differences among the cements were limited.

scholarly journals Comparative evaluation of the microleakage of two modified glass ionomer cements on primary molars. An in vivo study

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaila Masih ◽  
George Koshy ◽  
AbiMathew Thomas ◽  
JL Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer

IN VIVO EVALUATION OF BOVINE XENOGRAFT ASSOCIATED WITH OXYGEN THERAPY IN ALVEOLAR BONE REPAIR

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camila Saggioro ◽  
Suelen Sartoretto ◽  
Isabelle Duarte ◽  
Adriana Alves ◽  
Helder Barreto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Repair ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Healing Process ◽  
Active Oxygen ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Wound Healing Process ◽  
Bovine Bone ◽  
In Vivo Evaluation ◽  
Significant Difference

In order to preserve alveolar bone thickness and width after extraction, clinical strategies have been adopted to reduce or eliminate the need for future surgical interventions to increase the alveolar ridge. The use of xenogeneic biomaterials has been increasing for such application. The association of bone substitutes with active oxygen-based materials, which is essential in the wound healing process, could accelerate the bone repair, optimizing the maintenance of alveolar architecture after extraction. However, the truth of this hypothesis is not clear. The present study aimed to compare the biological response to inorganic bovine bone graft Bonefill® (BF), associated or not with active oxygen-based gel Oral gel Blue ® m (BF+BM), in alveolar bone repair. Twenty female Wistar rats were randomly distributed, the left upper central incisor was extracted and the dental sockets were filled with BF in the control group (n=10), and with BF+BM in the experimental group (n=10). After 7- and 42-days’ post implantation (n=5), the animals were euthanized, and the samples were processed for descriptive histological and histomorphometric evaluations. The results showed no significant difference between the groups (p>0.05). Both groups presented a time-dependent increase of new formed bone and biosorption biomaterial (p=0.0001). While the biomaterial analyzed was considered compatible and osteoconductive, the association with Blue ® m gel did not improve or interfere with the bone repair after the experimental periods.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document