Evaluation of physical–chemical properties and biocompatibility of a microrough and smooth bioactive glass particles
- 127 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to evaluate physical–chemical and biocompatibility characteristics of a simple synthesis and low cost experimental bioactive glass. Physical and chemical properties were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive (EDX), X-ray fluorescence (XRF) and X-ray diffraction (XRD). The biomaterials were subcutaneously implanted into rats, according to the following groups: G1, PerioGlas™; G2, Biogran™, G3, Experimental Bioactive Glass U (BGU) and G4, Control (Sham). After 7, 15, 21, 45, and 60 days, 5 animals/group/period were sacrificed and the subcutaneous tissue was dissected for histological and histometric analysis, considering inflammatory reaction and granulation area, presence of polymorphonuclear (PMN), monuclear (MN) and fibroblast (F) cells. SEM analysis of biomaterials showed irregular particles with different surface characteristics. EDX showed calcium, oxygen, sodium, phosphorus and silicon; XRF revealed silica oxide (SiO2), sodium oxide (Na2O), calcium oxide (CaO) and phosphorus oxide (P2O5). XRD indicated non crystalline phase. Measurement of tissue reaction showed similar results among the experimental groups at 45 and 60 days. No difference was found for PMN, MN and F cell counts. All biomaterials exhibited partial resorption. In conclusion, the experimental bioactive glass analyzed showed physical and chemical characteristics similar to the commercially available biomaterials, and was considered biocompatible, being partially reabsorbed in the subcutaneous tissue.
KeywordsBioactive Glass Tissue Reaction Acid Etching Calcium Oxide Autogenous Bone Graft
This work was supported by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), Brazil.
- 1.D.C. Cancian, E. Hochuli-Vieira, R.A. Marcantonio, I.R. Garcia Junior, Utilization of autogenous bone, bioactive glasses, and calcium phosphate cement in surgical mandibular bone defects in Cebus apella monkeys. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 19, 73 (2004)Google Scholar
- 2.A. El-Ghannam, H. Amin, T. Nasr, A. Shama, Enhancement of bone regeneration and graft material resorption using surface-modified bioactive glass in cortical and human maxillary cystic bone defects. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 19, 184 (2004)Google Scholar
- 4.K.A. Al Ruhaimi, Bone graft substitutes: a comparative qualitative histologic review of current osteoconductive grafting materials. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 16, 105 (2001)Google Scholar
- 9.E. Schepers, L. Barbier, P. Ducheyne, Implant placement enhanced by bioactive glass particles of narrow size range. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 13, 655 (1998)Google Scholar
- 14.A. Itälä, V.V. Välimäki, R. Kiviranta, H.O. Ylanen, M. Hupa, E. Vuorio, H.T. Aro, Molecular biologic comparison of new bone formation and resorption on microrough and smooth bioactive glass microspheres. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. 65, 170 (2003)Google Scholar
- 16.W. Lai, J. Garino, C. Flaitz, P. Ducheyne, Excretion of resorption products from bioactive glass implanted in rabbit muscle. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 75, 398 (2005)Google Scholar
- 19.T. Wilson, V. Parikka, J. Holmbom, H. Ylanen, R. Penttinen, Intact surface of bioactive glass S53P4 is resistant to osteoclastic activity. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 77, 67 (2006)Google Scholar