Advertisement

Rare Metals

pp 1–11 | Cite as

Mg-based absorbable membrane for guided bone regeneration (GBR): a pilot study

  • Wei Peng
  • Jun-Xiu Chen
  • Xian-Feng Shan
  • Yi-Chuan Wang
  • Fan He
  • Xue-Jin WangEmail author
  • Li-Li TanEmail author
  • Ke Yang
Article
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

A novel calcium-phosphate (Ca–P)-coated magnesium (Mg) membrane used for guided bone regeneration (GBR) was studied. The microstructural characterization, electrochemical test, immersion test, fluorescence labeling analysis and histopathological evaluation were carried out. The results showed that Ca–P coating could obviously improve the corrosion resistance of the pure Mg membrane. The in vivo results showed that Mg membrane coated with Ca–P would take 8 weeks to be completely absorbed. However, Mg membrane was completely absorbed within 1 week. Histopathological evaluation showed that the Ca–P-coated Mg membranes were significantly better than Ti membranes at the early implantation time (4 weeks), and with the time prolonging, the performance of the coated Mg membrane was not as good as pure Ti membranes (but still better than blank group) at 8 and 12 weeks. The coated biodegradable Mg membrane had a good promising application in GBR. But further studies have to be done to further decrease the degradation rate of pure Mg membrane.

Keywords

Bone defect Guided bone regeneration Ca–P-coated magnesium (Mg) membrane Bioabsorbable membrane 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was financially supported by the Key Program of China on Biomedical Materials Research and Tissue and Organ Replacement (Nos. 2016YFC1101804 and 2016YFC1100604) and Shenyang Key R&D and Technology Transfer Program (No. Z18-0-027).

References

  1. [1]
    Cho KS, Choi SH, Han KH, Chai JK, Wikesjo UME, Kim CK. Alveolar bone formation at dental implant dehiscence defects following guided bone regeneration and xenogeneic freeze-dried demineralized bone matrix. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1998;9(6):419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Arx TV, Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Buser D. Evaluation of a prototype trilayer membrane (PTLM) for lateral ridge augmentation: an experimental study in the canine mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;31(2):190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Vignoletti F, Matesanz P, Rodrigo D, Figuero E, Martin C, Sanz M. Surgical protocols for ridge preservation after tooth extraction. A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23:22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Rocchietta I, Fontana F, Simion M. Clinical outcomes of vertical bone augmentation to enable dental implant placement: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35:203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Aghaloo TL, Moy PK. Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22(7):49.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Wessing B, Lettner S, Zechner W. Guided bone regeneration with collagen membranes and particulate graft materials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018;33:87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Rakhmatia YD, Ayukawa Y, Furuhashi A, Koyano K. Current barrier membranes: titanium mesh and other membranes for guided bone regeneration in dental applications. J Prosthodont Res. 2013;57(1):3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Carpio L, Loza J, Lynch S, Genco R. Guided bone regeneration around endosseous implants with anorganic bovine bone mineral. A randomized controlled trial comparing bioabsorbable versus non-resorbable barriers. J Periodontol. 2000;71(11):1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Yoshikawa G, Murashima Y, Wadachi R, Sawada N, Suda H. Guided bone regeneration (GBR) using membranes and calcium sulphate after apicectomy: a comparative histomorphometrical study. Int Endod J. 2002;35(3):255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Liu J, Kerns DG. Mechanisms of guided bone regeneration: a review. Open Dent J. 2014;8:56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Mir-Mari J, Benic GI, Valmaseda-Castellon E, Hammerle CHF, Jung RE. Influence of wound closure on the volume stability of particulate and non-particulate GBR materials: an in vitro cone-beam computed tomographic examination. Part II. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28(6):631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Sheikh Z, Qureshi J, Alshahrani AM, Nassar H, Ikeda Y, Glogauer M, Ganss B. Collagen based barrier membranes for periodontal guided bone regeneration applications. Odontology. 2017;105(1):1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Hurzeler MB, Kohal RJ, Naghshbandi J, Mota LF, Conradt J, Hutmacher D, Caffesse RG. Evaluation of a new bioresorbable barrier to facilitate guided bone regeneration around exposed implant threads—an experimental study in the monkey. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998;27(4):315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Zhao DW, Witte F, Lu FQ, Wang JL, Li JL, Qin L. Current status on clinical applications of magnesium-based orthopaedic implants: a review from clinical translational perspective. Biomaterials. 2017;112:287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Kim BJ, Piao Y, Wufuer M, Son WC, Choi TH. Biocompatibility and efficiency of biodegradable magnesium-based plates and screws in the facial fracture model of beagles. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76(5):1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Lin DJ, Hung FY, Yeh ML, Lui TS. Microstructure-modified biodegradable magnesium alloy for promoting cytocompatibility and wound healing in vitro. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2015;26(10):248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Lavernia EJ, Srivatsan TS. The rapid solidification processing of materials: science, principles, technology, advances, and applications. J Mater Sci. 2010;45(2):287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Zhang CY, Zeng RC, Liu CL, Gao JC. Comparison of calcium phosphate coatings on Mg–Al and Mg–Ca alloys and their corrosion behavior in Hank’s solution. Surf Coat Technol. 2010;204:3636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Elgali I, Turri A, Xia W, Norlindh B, Johansson A, Dahlin C, Thomsen P, Omar O. Guided bone regeneration using resorbable membrane and different bone substitutes: early histological and molecular events. Acta Biomater. 2016;29:409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Chen J, Lu S, Tan L, Etim IP, Yang K. Comparative study on effects of different coatings on biodegradable and wear properties of Mg–2Zn–1Gd–0.5Zr alloy. Surf Coat Technol. 2018;352:273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Chen J, Tan L, Etim IP, Yang K. Comparative study of the effect of Nd and Y content on the mechanical and biodegradable properties of Mg–Zn–Zr–xNd/Y (x = 0.5, 1, 2) alloys. Mater Technol. 2018;33(10):659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Chen J, Tan L, Yu X, Yang K. Effect of minor content of Gd on the mechanical and degradable properties of as-cast Mg–2Zn–xGd–0.5Zr alloys. J Mater Sci Technol. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2018.10.022.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Xu LP, Pan F, Yu GN, Yang L, Zhang EL, Yang K. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the surface bioactivity of a calcium phosphate coated magnesium alloy. Biomaterials. 2009;30(8):1512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Tan L, Wang Q, Geng F, Xi XS, Qiu JH, Yang K. Preparation and characterization of Ca–P coating on AZ31 magnesium alloy. Trans Nonferr Met Soc. 2010;20:648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Delgado-Ruiz RA, Calvo-Guirado JL, Romanos GE. Critical size defects for bone regeneration experiments in rabbit calvariae: systematic review and quality evaluation using ARRIVE guidelines. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(8):915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Song GL, Song SZ. A possible biodegradable magnesium implant material. Adv Eng Mater. 2007;9(4):298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Lin DJ, Hung FY, Lee HP, Yeh ML. Development of a novel degradation-controlled magnesium-based regeneration membrane for future guided bone regeneration (GBR) therapy. Met Basel. 2017;7(11):481.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Klopfleisch R, Jung F. The pathology of the foreign body reaction against biomaterials. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2017;105(3):927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Franz S, Rammelt S, Scharnweber D, Simon JC. Immune responses to implants—a review of the implications for the design of immunomodulatory biomaterials. Biomaterials. 2011;32(28):6692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Hao YL, Li SJ, Yang R. Biomedical titanium alloys and their additive manufacturing. Rare Met. 2016;35(9):661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Nonferrous Metals Society of China and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of StomatologyAffiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Dalian UniversityDalianChina
  2. 2.Medical School of Dalian UniversityDalianChina
  3. 3.Institute of Metal ResearchChinese Academy of SciencesShenyangChina
  4. 4.School of Materials Science and EngineeringUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaShenyangChina

Personalised recommendations