Bone growth evaluation in collagen-hydroxyapatite implant locations using digital radiography: an animal model

  • Laela Sari Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
  • Siti Julia Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
  • Lukmanda Evan Lubis Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
  • Dwi Seno Kuncoro Sihono Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7670-2293
  • Yessie Widya Sari Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, IPB University (Bogor Agricultural University)
  • Djarwani Soeharso Soejoko Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
Keywords: bone growth, bone implant, collagen, digital radiography, hydroxyapatite
Abstract viewed: 21 times
PDF downloaded: 16 times
HTML downloaded: 5 times
EPUB downloaded: 6 times

Abstract

BACKGROUND Digital radiography has been used to evaluate the progress of bone growth with a collagen-hydroxyapatite implant in rabbit tibias. This study aimed to introduce digital radiography methods that provide comprehensive data availability for continuous information retrieval from the implant preparation to the cultivation period.

METHODS 38 digital radiographs were divided into 3 treatment groups, namely a single defect without implant (control), single-implant, and three-implant. Radiographic acquisitions were performed at preparation time and post-implantation from 0 to 56 days. Observations were concentrated on the implantation site, followed by creating a lateral profile. The prediction of implantation growth was determined using relative bone density (RBD) percentage.

RESULTS Based on the profile, the recovery process consisted of implant absorption and new bone tissue deposition. The absorption process was highly influenced by the defect size. In the control and single-implant groups, regardless of the different recovery processes, similar recovery results were observed 56 days post-implantation, with an RBD value of approximately 90%. Meanwhile, the three-implant group only had an RBD value of 62%.

CONCLUSIONS Radiography can evaluate absorption and new bone growth during implantation in New Zealand white rabbits. Radiographs, which can be obtained at any time during cultivation, offered more information on the recovery implantation process than the other method that relies on data obtained after sacrificing the animals.

References

  1. Wong JY, Bronzino JD, Peterson DR, editors. Biomaterials: principles and practices. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1201/b13687

  2. Knop C, Sitte I, Canto F, Reinhold M, Blauth M. Successful posterior interlaminar fusion at the thoracic spine by sole use of beta-tricalcium phosphate. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2006;126(3):204-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-006-0107-8

  3. Mahyudin F. [Bone graft and bone replacement materials: characteristics and clinical application strategies]. Utomo DN, editor. Surabaya: Airlangga University Press; 2018. Indonesian.

  4. Hartono SA. [Intradermal Irritation test and radiography density of HA:Ce-Zn bone graft in femoral bone and muscle of Sprague Dawley rats] [thesis]. Bogor: IPB Unversity; 2021. Indonesian.

  5. Rémi E, Khelil N, Di Centa I, Roques C, Ba M, Medjahed-Hamidi F, et al. Pericardial processing: challenges, outcomes and future prospects, biomaterials science and engineering. Oxford: INTECH Open Access Publisher; 2011. p. 437-56. In: Pignatello R, editors. Chapter 22, Biomaterials science and engineering. https://doi.org/10.5772/24949

  6. Bohner M, Galea L, Doebelin N. Calcium phosphate bone graft substitutes: failures and hopes. J Eur Ceram Soc. 2012;32(11):2663-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2012.02.028

  7. Moore WR, Graves SE, Bain GI. Synthetic bone graft substitutes. ANZ J Surg. 2001;71(6):354-61. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1622.2001.02128.x

  8. Arifin A. [Development of hydroxyapatite/titanium compiste as implants using metal injection molding (MIM) technology]. Palembang: Unsri Press; 2017. p. 1-82. Indonesian.

  9. Azami M, Tavakol S, Samadikuchaksaraei A, Hashjin MS, Baheiraei N, Kamali M, et al. A Porous hydroxyapatite/gelatin nanocomposite scaffold for bone tissue repair: in vitro and in vivo evaluation. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2012;23(18):2353-68. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856211X617713

  10. Liu C. Collagen-hydroxyapatite composite scaffolds for tissue engineering hydroxyapatite (Hap) for biomedical applications. Elsevier Ltd.; 2015. p. 211-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-78242-033-0.00010-9

  11. Yang X, Li Y, Huang Q, Yang J, Shen B, Pei F. Evaluation of a biodegradable graft substitute in rabbit bone defect model. Indian J Orthop. 2012;46(3):266-73. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.96371

  12. Purwanti S. [Radiography evaluation of hydroxyapatite-chitosan (HA-C) and hydroxyapatite-tricalcium phosphate (HA-TCP) bone implant in sheep as animal model for human] [thesis]. Bogor: IPB University; 2010. Indonesian.

  13. Geiger M, Blem G, Ludwig A. Evaluation of ImageJ for relative bone density measurement and clinical application. J Oral Health Craniofac Sci. 2016;1:012-21. https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.johcs.1001002

  14. Lee SW, Hahn BD, Kang TY, Lee MJ, Choi JY, Kim MK, et al. Hydroxyapatite and collagen combination-coated dental implants display better bone formation in the peri-implant area than the same combination plus bone morphogenetic protein-2-coated implants, hydroxyapatite only coated implants, and uncoated implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;72(1):53-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2013.08.031

  15. Hoshi M, Taira M, Sawada T, Hachinohe Y, Hatakeyama W, Takafuji K, et al. Preparation of collagen/hydroxyapatite composites using the alternate immersion method and evaluation of the cranial bone-forming capability of composites complexed with acidic gelatin and b-FGF. Materials (Basel). 2022;15(24):8802. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15248802

  16. Minardi S, Taraballi F, Cabrera FJ, Van Eps J, Wang X, Gazze SA, et al. Biomimetic hydroxyapatite/collagen composite drives bone niche recapitulation in a rabbit orthotopic model. Mater Today Bio. 2019;2:100005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtbio.2019.100005

  17. Windolf M, Varjas V, Gehweiler D, Schwyn R, Arens D, Constant C, et al. Continuous implant load monitoring to assess bone healing status-evidence from animal testing. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022;58(7):858. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58070858

Published
2024-02-05
How to Cite
1.
Sari L, Julia S, Lubis LE, Sihono DSK, Sari YW, Soejoko DS. Bone growth evaluation in collagen-hydroxyapatite implant locations using digital radiography: an animal model. Med J Indones [Internet]. 2024Feb.5 [cited 2024May31];32(4):200-4. Available from: http://mji.ui.ac.id/journal/index.php/mji/article/view/7051
Section
Basic Medical Research

Most read articles by the same author(s)