title: Impact of biomaterial microtopography on bone regeneration: comparison of three hydroxyapatites.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The primary objective of this study was to compare the in vivo performance, namely in terms of quantity of newly formed bone and bone-to-material contact (osteoconductivity), of three hydroxyapatite-based biomaterials (HA) of different origins (natural or synthetic) or manufacturing process in a sinus lift model in rabbits. The secondary objective was to correlate the findings with the physical and topographical characteristics of the biomaterials.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two bovine HA manufactured with different processes (bovine hydroxyapatites [BHA] and cuttlebone hydroxyapatite [CBHA]) and a synthetic hydroxyapatite (SHA) sintered at high temperature were characterised with scanning electronic microscopy (SEM) and the measurement of specific surface area (BET). The materials were implanted in a sinus lift model in rabbits; histological and histomorphometric evaluation using non-decalcified sections was performed at 1, 5 and 12 weeks after implantation.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The studied biomaterials displayed a different surface topography. The two natural HA displayed significantly higher bone quantities (P = 0.0017; BHA vs. SHA, P = 0.0018 and CBHA vs. SHA, P = 0.033) at 5 and 12 weeks compared to the synthetic one (SHA). Moreover, the osteoconductivity (bone-to-material contact) was significantly higher in the BHA group compared to the two other groups (P = 0.014; BHA vs. SHA, P = 0.023 and BHA vs. CBHA, P = 0.033).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  HA-based biomaterials from diverse origins and manufacturing processes displayed different topographical characteristics. This may have influenced different regenerated bone architecture observed; more bone was found with natural HA compared to the synthetic one, and significantly higher bone-to-material contacts were found with BHA.
authors: Department of Periodontology and Oral Surgery, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
authors: France
authors: F
authors: Lambert
authors: Dental Biomaterials Research Unit (d-BRU), Faculty of Medicine, University of Liege, Liège, Belgium.|Clinic of Oral Surgery, School of Dental Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
authors: Miljana
authors: M
authors: Bacevic
authors: Inserm U957, Laboratory of Physiopathology of Bone Resorption, Faculty of Medicine, University of Nantes, Liège, France.
authors: Pierre
authors: P
authors: Layrolle
authors: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.|Regents University, Augusta, GA, USA.
authors: Peter
authors: P
authors: Schüpbach
authors: Central Animal Facility, Giga-R, University of Liege, Liège, Belgium.
authors: Pierre
authors: P
authors: Drion
authors: Department of Periodontology and Oral Surgery, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
authors: Eric
authors: E
authors: Rompen
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D001861:Bone Regeneration; D018786:Bone Substitutes; D017886:Durapatite; D008297:Male; D008903:Minerals; D011817:Rabbits; D013499:Surface Properties
chemical_list: C077540:Bio-Oss; D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D018786:Bone Substitutes; D008903:Minerals; C104266:endobon; D017886:Durapatite
keywords: bone regeneration; hydroxyapatite; osteoconduction; surface characteristics