Comparative Evaluation of GBR Techniques Using Zirconia Barrier Membrane: An In-vivo Study | Chapter 5 | Medicine and Medical Research: New Perspectives Vol. 7

 

Aims: This study aims to evaluate the effects of customized zirconia barrier membranes produced for guided bone regeneration approaches on bone healing researched with histological and histomorphometric methods.

 

Study Design: In vivo experimental study.

 

Place and Duration of Study: The digital modeling and writing phase took place at Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Implantology. The surgeries and sacrification procedures for the experimental animals were carried out in the operating rooms of the Surgery Department at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Bursa Uludag University. The bone tissue samples obtained were histologically and histomorphometrically evaluated in the laboratories of the Pathology Department at the same university. The study started in August 2022 and ended in February 2024.

 

Methodology: The research involved using digital modeling to create zirconia barrier membranes suitable for a defect in the tibia bone. These membranes were designed using a 3D software system and transferred to the CAD/CAM software system in STL format. Zirconia discs (1400 Mpa) (Aconia BSM- D98x16, HT+, Germany) were then milled and sintered. The defects were covered using titanium mesh, titanium-reinforced d-PTFE, and zirconia barrier membranes, while one defect was left empty for the control group. At 3 and 6 weeks into the healing period, samples were obtained from each group after sacrificing the animals. Histomorphometric and histological analyses were conducted to evaluate new bone formation, the amount of remaining grafts, and tissue response parameters.

 

Results: The newly formed bone amounts of the zirconia barrier membrane, titanium membrane, and d-PTFE membrane groups were significantly higher than the control group in the 3rd and 6th weeks. The amount of residual graft progressed at a low level in both periods without any difference in the other groups except the control group. No foreign body reaction or necrosis was observed in any of the defects.

 

Conclusion: With the limitation of the study, it has been concluded that effective results can be obtained with zirconia barrier membranes in GBR procedures.

 

Author (s) Details

 Zeynep Tuncludemir
Institute of Graduate Studies in Health Sciences, Oral Implantology Program, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkiye.

 

Please see the book here:- https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/mmrnp/v7/2347

Stem Cells and Acellular Preparations in Bone Regeneration/Fracture Healing: Where are We Now? | Chapter 9 | Achievements and Challenges of Medicine and Medical Science Vol. 8

The term ‘stem cell’ (stammzelle) was first introduced into the scientific community in the late 19th century by zoologists Theodor Boveri and Valentin Häcker, who proposed the existence of a universal precursor cell for both primordial germ and somatic cells. Bone/fracture healing is a complex process with different steps and four basic tissue layers being affected: cortical bone, periosteum, fascial tissue surrounding the fracture, and bone marrow. Stem cells and their derivatives, including embryonic stem cells, induced pluripotent stem cells, mesenchymal stem cells, hematopoietic stem cells, skeletal stem cells, and multipotent stem cells, can function to artificially introduce highly regenerative cells into decrepit biological tissues and augment the healing process at the tissue level. Stem cells are molecularly and functionally indistinguishable from standard human tissues. The widespread appeal of stem cell therapy lies in its potential benefits as a therapeutic technology that, if harnessed, can be applied in clinical settings.

There are many challenges associated with stem cell therapy including differentiating stem cells into a desired cell line and the risk of stem cells developing into cancerous cell lines. Stem cells also carry a risk of being rejected by the host immune system whether they be allogeneic or autologous in nature. Beyond the cellular preparations, there exists acellular therapies, many of which have made their own contribution to the field of stem cell therapy. The ability of acellular preparations to harness the potential of growth factors through extracellular vesicles or secretomes provides many new and promising opportunities. The role of paracrine signaling as it relates to stem cell therapy for example is critical in making acellular solutions all the more viable as a therapy. Clinically, autologous bone grafting remains the standard for repairing bone defects. As stem cell engineering has evolved however, an increasing number of clinical trials have utilized bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells with a shift towards greater utilization of umbilical cord-derived stem cells, amniotic stem cells (ASCs) and induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) therapies. These treatments have provided varying levels of healing in the spine, long bone fractures, facial bone fractures and even hip arthroplasty patients with bone healing defects. Many preclinical models have highlighted the use of these human pluripotent stem cells including both small and large animal models. Multipotent stem cells including hematopoietic, mesenchymal and even skeletal stem cells, have also shown increasing efficacy in many preclinical models.

This review aims to establish the molecular pathophysiology of bone healing, the current stem cell interventions that disrupt or augment the bone healing process, and finally, consider the future direction/therapeutic options related to stem cells and bone healing. Understanding the mechanism, applications and therapeutic evidence behind current stem cell interventions will allow better implementation of these therapies through more preclinical and clinical trials with the eventual goal of meaningful clinical intervention. 

 

Author (s) Details

Marcel G. Brown
Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.

 

Davis J. Brady
Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.

 

Kelsey M. Healy
Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.

 

Kaitlin A. Henry
Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.

 

Ayobami S. Ogunsola
Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.

 

Xue Ma
Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.

 

 

Please see the book here:- https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/acmms/v8/3334

A Comprehensive Review of 3D and 4D Bioprinting Techniques and Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration Applications | Chapter 7 | Advanced Concepts in Pharmaceutical Research Vol. 4

 Material Skill, Medicine and Chemistry are research fields that turn us towards the field of biomaterials and fabric engineering. The making of biomaterials for drug childbirth, tissue engineering and added medical analyst is basically planted on allure. Moreover, the tangible and chemical properties of matters can also balance the organic responses. In this item, we report the evolution of biomaterials accompanying time, their types and their use in bone fabric engineering. Miscellaneous polymers which are attractive biomaterials for their potential in biomedical requests have been argued. Authors have also conversed about 3D Publication as a technology and all process of bioprinting. Fore coming biomaterials which maybe used for 3D bioprinting and what are the environments of such materials have too been considered in brief. Future perspectives on biomaterials, 3D and 4D biography- printing are still mentioned.

Author(s) Details:

Gurdev Preet Singh,
Department of Physics, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab 143005, India.

Kanika Chandel,
Department of Physics, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab 143005, India.

K. J. Singh,
Department of Physics, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab 143005, India.

Please see the link here: https://stm.bookpi.org/ACPR-V4/article/view/12928

Amniotic Fluid Mesenchymal Stromal Cells as Innovative and Advantageous Resource for Bone Regeneration | Chapter 01 | New Horizons in Medicine and Medical Research Vol. 4

 Tissue engineering using stem cells is a viable therapy option for people with bone abnormalities. Mesenchymal stromal cells of various origins have been widely investigated and used in orthopaedics.

Opinions are still divided. Although bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells are routinely used in clinical practise, new research suggests that mesenchymal stromal cells from extra-embryonic tissues, such as amniotic fluid, could be a more inventive and beneficial resource for bone repair. The use of cells from amniotic fluid poses no ethical issues and gives a large number of cells without invasive treatments. Furthermore, unlike pluripotent stem cells, they do not grow into teratomas after transplantation. They are attractive candidates for bone regeneration medicine because of their multipotent differentiation ability, minimal immunogenicity, and anti-inflammatory characteristics.

We present an overview of the current state-of-the-art of amniotic fluid-derived cells' osteogenic capacity, as well as the various techniques available to promote bone regeneration. We focused on the tactics used to improve in vitro osteogenesis to highlight the current development in this sector. Importantly, a thorough understanding of the activity of amniotic fluid mesenchymal stromal cells and their osteogenic potential is desirable in the context of bone regenerative medicine.

Author(S) Details

Caterina Pipino
Center for Advanced Studies and Technology-CAST (ex CeSI-MeT), StemTeCh Group, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University G. d’Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

Ilaria Cappellacci
Center for Advanced Studies and Technology-CAST (ex CeSI-MeT), StemTeCh Group, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University G. d’Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

Letizia Pelusi
Center for Advanced Studies and Technology-CAST (ex CeSI-MeT), StemTeCh Group, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University G. d’Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

Nadia Di Pietrantonio
Center for Advanced Studies and Technology-CAST (ex CeSI-MeT), StemTeCh Group, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University G. d’Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

Domitilla Mandatori
Center for Advanced Studies and Technology-CAST (ex CeSI-MeT), StemTeCh Group, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University G. d’Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

Natalia Di Pietro
Center for Advanced Studies and Technology-CAST (ex CeSI-MeT), StemTeCh Group, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University G. d’Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

Assunta Pandolfi
Center for Advanced Studies and Technology-CAST (ex CeSI-MeT), StemTeCh Group, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University G. d’Annunzio of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.

View Book:- https://stm.bookpi.org/NHMMR-V4/article/view/6363