Original Article

Efficacy of iranian-made bone substitutes for regeneration of rabbit calvarial bone defects: cenobone versus the ITB


Introduction: Efforts are being made to improve the efficacy of biomaterials used as bone substitutes for bone regeneration in the oral and maxillofacial region. Graft materials have been recently produced in Iran; however, studies are required to confirm their efficacy. This study aimed to compare the histomorphometric results of using mineralized allografts produced by the Hamanandsaz Baft Kish Company and the Iranian Tissue Bank (ITB) for regeneration of rabbit calvarial bone defects.Materials and Methods: In this animal study, four similar holes with a minimum diameter of 6.5 mm were created in the calvaria of 14 white New Zealand rabbits. The defects were filled with Cenobone (Hamanandsaz Baft Kish Co.), ITB product and Cerabone (Botiss Co). One defect remained unfilled as the control group. One and two months after implantation, the animals were sacrificed and the defects was subjected to histologic and histomorphometric assessments. The amount of new bone formation and the volume of remaining biomaterials were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. The inflammatory reaction was analyzed by the Kruskal Wallis test and the foreign body reaction, bone quality and bone-graft interface pattern were analyzed using the Fisher’s exact test.Results: The amount of new bone formation was 0.060.1± and 0.11± 0.1, 0.040.08± and 0.110.09±, and 0.080.12± and 0.090.06± mm2 in the ITB, Cerabone and Cenobone groups at one and two months post-implantation, respectively.The effect of time and type of biomaterial on the amount of new bone formation was not significant. At one month, significant differences were seen in the amount of remaining biomaterials in the defects among the three groups (P<0.05). The highest amount of remaining biomaterial was noted in the Cenobone and Cerabone groups. At two months, this difference was not statistically significant. At one month, moderate inflammation was noted in most defects and no difference was found among the groups (P<0.04). At two months, mild inflammation was observed in most defects with no statistically significant difference among them.Conclusion: Bone allografts such as Cenobone and ITB had optimal efficacy for bone regeneration in rabbit calvarial defects comparable to that of Cerabone xenograft. Considering the limitations of in vitro studies, application of these biomaterials must be evaluated in clinical studies.Keywords: Bone formation, Cenobone, Cerabone, Calvarial defects.

Stavoropoulos A, Kostopollos L, Karring T. Depro- teinized bovine bone and bio-active glass arrest bone formation when used as an adjunct to GTR.J Clin Periodontol 2002; 30 (7): 636-643.

Lindhe J, Lang NP, Karring T. Clinical Periodon- tology and Implant Dentistry. Fifth edition, Black- well publishing Ltd. 2008; 25: 551-552.

Cenobone (Allograft Bone bioimplant) Cata- logue. Kish Hamanand Saz Baft Company.

Sarkarat F, Sadri D, Bahluli B, Louzani S. Com- parisons between OSSEO + and Cenobone in the socket preservation and bone formation of alveo- lar ridge following tooth extractions. Research in Dental Sciences 2010; 7 (3): 1-7.

Shahoon H. Radiographic assessments of HECB- MG biomaterial with DBM on the healing of human alveolar bone defects. Danshvar Med J 2010; 17 (87): 1-11.

Amooian B, Seyyed Majidi M, Haji Ahmadi M, Kiakujouri A. Clinical, histologic and histomor- phometric assessments of bone strip allograft with absorbable membrane in the reconstruction of al- veolar ridge. A thesis for postgraduate degree in Periodontics, Dental School, Babol University of Medical Sciences; 2012-2013.

Abolfazli N, Saleh Saber F, Lafzi A, Eskandari A, S.A clinical Mehrasbi In of Cerabone (freeze-dried

A Decalcified Allograft bone) with autogenous bone graft in the treatment of intra-bony Two-

and three-wall periodontal defects: a human studywith six-month reentry. JODDD 2008; 2 (1): 1-8.

Moghareh Abed M, Pestekan RH, Yaghini J, Raza- vi SM, Tavakoli M, Amjadi M. A Comparison of Two Types of Decalcified Freeze -Dried Bone Al- lograft in Treatment of Defects dehiscence around Implants in Dogs. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2011; Summer 8 (3): 132-137.

Eppley BL, Pietrzak WS, Blanton MW. Allograft and alloplastic bone substitutes: a review of sci- ence and technology for the cranio-maxillofacial surgeon. J Craniofac Surg 2005 Nov; 16 (6): 981-989.

Vaziri S, Vahabi S, Torshabi M, Hematzadeh S. In vitro assay for freeze-dried bone Demineralized Allograft Osteoinductive activity of different. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2012 Dec; 42 (6): 224-230.

Ravi S, Qu Z, Chaikof EL. Polymeric materials for tissue engineering of arterial substitutes. Vascular

; 17 (Suppl 1): S45-S54.

Choi YJ, Noh I. Media tissue regeneration of the hybrid expanded poly-tetrafluoroethylene vas- cular graft via gelatin coating. Current Applied Physics 2005 July 5 (5): 463-467.

Cornell CN. Osteobiologics. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 2004; 62: 13-17.

Tadjoedin ES, DeLange GL, Holzmann PJ, Kulper L, Burger EH. Histologic observations on biopsies harvested following sinus floor elevation using a bioactive glass material of narrow size range. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11: 334-344.

Froum SJ, Tarnow DP, Wallace SS, Rohrer MD, Cho SC. Sinus floor elevation using anorganic bo- vine bone matrix (OsteoGraft / N) with and with- out autogenous bone: A clinical, histologic, radio- graphic and histomorphometric analysis-Part 2 of an ongoing study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1998; 18: 528-543.

Mellonig JT, Bowers GM, Bailey RC. Comparison of bone graft materials. Part I. New bone forma- tion with autografts and allografts determined by Strontium - 85. J Periodontol 1981; 52 (6): 291-296.

Schwartz Z, Somers A, Mellonig JT, Carnes DL Jr, Dean DD, Cochran DL, et al. Ability of com- mercial demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft to induce new bone formation is dependent on donor age but not gender. J Periodontol 1998; 69:470-478.

Mellonig JT, Levey RA. The effect of different par- ticle sizes of freeze-dried bone allograft on bone growth. J Dent Res 1984; 63: 222 (Abstract 461).

Shigeyama Y, D’Errico JA, Stone R, Somerman MJ. Commercially-prepared allograft material has biological activity in vitro. J Periodontol 1995; 66:478-487.

Fucini SE, Quintero G, Gher ME, Black BS, Rich- ardson AC. Small versus large particles of demin- eralized freeze-dried bone allografts in human intrabony periodontal defects. J Periodontol 1993;64: 844-847.

Newman M, Takei H, Kokkevold P, Carranza F.Clinical Periodontology. 10 th Ed. St. Louis. MO:WB Saunders 2006: 976-982.

Friedmann A, Dard M, Kleber BM. Ridge Aug- mentation and Maxillary Sinus Grafting with a Bi- phasic Calcium Phosphate: Histologic and Histo- morphometric Observations. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009 Jul; 20 (7): 708-714.

Geurs NC, Korostoff JM, Vassilopoulos PJ. Clin- ical and histologic assessment of lateral alveolar ridge augmentation using a synthetic long-term bioabsorbable membrane and an allograft. J Peri- odontol 2008; 79: 1133-1140.

IssueVol 3, No 2 (Spring 2016) QRcode
SectionOriginal Article(s)
Bone formation Cenobone Cerabone Calvarial defects

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Mohammadi F, Ahmadieh Yazdi A, Noravesh F, Hosseini Toudeshki H, Bahrami N. Efficacy of iranian-made bone substitutes for regeneration of rabbit calvarial bone defects: cenobone versus the ITB. J Craniomaxillofac Res. 2016;3(2):177-184.