Resolution of surgically created three-wall intrabony defects in implants using three different biomaterials: an in vivo study.

Objectives To histomorphometrically analyze bone formation on amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP), micro-macroporous biphasic calcium phosphate (MBCP), and freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in three-wall defects adjacent to structured surface with calcium phosphate nanocoating implants in dogs. Materials and methods Five male mixed-breed dogs were used in this study. The premolars and molars were extracted on both sides of the mandible. Eight weeks after extraction, four implants were submerged on each side of the mandible. Three-wall intrabony defects (5 x 3 x 3 mm) were surgically created adjacent to the implants before installation. No grafts were placed in the control group. At the experimental sites, each intrabony defect was grafted with either ACP, MBCP, or FDBA. The dogs were sacrificed after 12 weeks, and histological and histomorphometrical analyses of the implant sites were performed. Results All of the three experimental groups exhibited defect resolution and osseointegration that showed a statistically significant difference compared with the control group in terms of remaining defect depth and bone-to-implant contact (BIC). However, there were no statistical significances among the three experimental groups. MBCP had the highest BIC (63.57 +/- 21.57%), followed by ACP and FDBA. The control group showed the least bone area and the greatest remaining defect depth. Conclusion Grafts with the synthetic biomaterials ACP and MBCP showed bone regeneration that was similar to FDBA in surgically created three-wall intrabony defects adjacent to implants. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that ACP and MBCP synthetic biomaterials are as effective as FDBA at osteoconduction. To cite this article:Choi J-Y, Jung U-W, Lee I-S, Kim C-S, Lee Y-K, Choi S-H. Resolution of surgically created three-wall intrabony defects in implants using three different biomaterials: an in vivo study.Clin. Oral Impl. Res 22, 2011; 343-348.doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01978.x.