Aim. To evaluate the efficacy of bone repair using xenogeneic native bone collagen (Bongraf COLLAGEN) as compared to other widely applied orthopaedic solutions (xenogeneic native bone mineral Geistlich Bio-Oss® and bone autograft).Materials and Methods. We employed a conventional critical-sized (8 mm) rat calvarial defect model (48 Wistar or Sprague-Dawley rats). The artificial defect was repaired using Bongraf COLLAGEN, Geistlich Bio-Oss® utilised as a comparator, bone calvarial autograft, or remained unfilled (n = 6 per group). Rats were euthanised 4 or 12 weeks postimplantation (n = 3 per time point) with the subsequent examination (repair extent, volume, thickness and mineral density of the repaired tissue) by means of microcomputed tomography and hematoxylin and eosin staining.Results. Expectedly, highest volume, thickness and mineral density of the repaired tissue have been observed in defects filled with autografts. Bongraf COLLAGEN and Geistlich Bio-Oss® also demonstrated a comparable and significant repair capability, yet the former option demonstrated higher bone regeneration rate.Conclusion. Xenogeneic native bone collagen (Bongraf COLLAGEN) is comparable with xenogeneic native bone mineral (Geistlich Bio-Oss®).
Bone repair of the rat calvarial defect after application of the xenogeneic biomaterials and dentin
