title: The impact of surface roughness and permeability in hydroxyapatite bone regeneration membranes.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  One of the crucial aspects in guided bone regeneration is the space maintenance. This is normally created by a membrane, which should primarily be accepted by the surrounding tissues without causing any adverse reactions. The impact of surface topography, biological acceptance as well as permeability of these membranes has been carefully discussed in the literature.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this study was to evaluate histologically the bone forming properties inside of hollow hydroxyapatite space-maintaining devices with different inner surfaces and different permeabilities in an animal calvaria model in vivo.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 36 hollow domes with three different designs made of hydroxyapatite were surgically attached to the skulls of rabbits. Group 1 had a moderately rough inner surface. Group 2 had a smooth inner surface. Group 3 had the same properties as Group 1 but had macroscopic holes on the top. The domes were left to heal for 12 weeks and were then processed for undecalcified ground sectioning. Histological evaluations were performed using a light microscope and scanning electron microscopy. The bone-implant contact (BIC) percentage along the device was calculated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The median percentage of BIC was higher for Group 1 compared with Group 2 (P = 0.004). Group 1 produced a larger median BIC compared with Group 3 (P < 0.0001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Within the limits of this preclinical study, these findings suggest that a moderately rough inner surface of a ceramic membrane along with a non-permeable device produces more bone than a smooth inner surface.
authors.affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.|Maxillofacial Unit Halmstad, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.
authors.forename: Jonas
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Anderud
authors.affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
authors.forename: Ryo
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Jimbo
authors.affiliation: Maxillofacial Unit Halmstad, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Abrahamsson
authors.affiliation: Swerea, IVF, Mölndal, Sweden.
authors.forename: Erik
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Adolfsson
authors.affiliation: Maxillofacial Unit Halmstad, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.
authors.forename: Johan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Malmström
authors.affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
authors.forename: Ann
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Wennerberg
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D001861:Bone Regeneration; D017886:Durapatite; D048091:Guided Tissue Regeneration / Q000379:methods*; D008567:Membranes, Artificial; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D011817:Rabbits; D012886:Skull / Q000601:surgery; D013499:Surface Properties
chemical_list: D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D008567:Membranes, Artificial; D017886:Durapatite
keywords: animal experiments; biomaterials; bone regeneration; guided tissue regeneration; surface chemistry