4.4 Article

An animal evaluation of a paste of chitosan glutamate and hydroxyapatite as a synthetic bone graft material

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.10050

Keywords

bone graft; paste; animal study; chitosan; hydroxyapatite

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to develop a synthetic bone graft in a paste form. Reported here are the results of the evaluation of a paste of chitosan glutamate (Protosan(R)) and hydroxyapatite (referred to as a paste) used in a critical size defect model in rats. Eight-millimeter-diameter cranial defects were made in rat calvaria following a protocol approved by the animal review committee. Five groups were studied: (1) empty control, (2) defect filled with paste only, (3) defect filled with the paste containing bone-marrow aspirate, (4) defect filled with paste containing BMP-2, and (5) defect filled with paste containing osteoblasts cultured from bone-marrow aspirate. The sacrifice intervals were 9 and 18 weeks. Calvaria containing the defect were harvested, and the bone mineral density (BMD) was determined by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Push-out strength measurements were also performed. The BMD values of empty control were significantly lower than those of other groups at both 9 and 18 weeks. The mechanical properties, that is, push-out strengths and area under the push-out load and displacement were not significantly different between the samples. Histological examination of Goldner-trichromestained undecalcified sections showed the presence of mineralized bone spicules in the defect areas that were more prominent in those filled with paste and osteoblasts cultured from bone-marrow aspirate. Hence, this study demonstrated that the paste of chitosan glutamate and hydroxyapatite-containing osteoblasts cultured from bone-marrow aspirate would be an effective material to repair bone defects. (C) 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available