We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26 (2011), No. 4     15. Aug. 2011
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26 (2011), No. 4  (15.08.2011)

Page 768-775, PubMed:21841986


Tissue Response and Wound Healing After Placement of Two Types of Bioengineered Grafts Containing Vital Cells in Submucosal Maxillary Pouches: An Experimental Pilot Study in Rabbits
Bornstein, Michael M. / Reichart, Peter A. / Buser, Daniel / Bosshardt, Dieter D.
Purpose: This pilot study evaluated the wound healing and tissue response after placement of two different skin substitutes in subgingival mucosal pouches in rabbits.
Materials and Methods: Four rabbits were selected to receive a commercially available skin substitute consisting of a collagen matrix with fibroblasts and an epithelial layer (test membrane 1) and a prototype device consisting of a collagen matrix with fibroblasts only (test membrane 2). In each rabbit, two horizontal incisions were made in the buccal alveolar mucosa of the maxilla bilaterally to create submucosal pouches. Three pouches in each animal were filled with either the test 1 or test 2 membranes, and one pouch was left without a membrane (sham-operated control). All rabbits were sacrificed after a healing period of 4 weeks, and histologic samples were prepared and examined.
Results: After a healing period of 1 month, both tested membranes were still visible in the sections. Test membrane 1 was still bilayered, contained inflammatory cells in its center, and was encapsulated by a thick fibrous tissue. Numerous ectopic calcifications were evident in the collagenous part of the membrane and in association with some basal epithelial cells. Test membrane 2 was also encapsulated in fibrous tissue, with inflammatory cells present only between the fibrous encapsulation and the remnants of the membrane. For test membrane 2, no calcifications were visible.
Conclusions: Test membrane 1 seemed to be more resistant to degradation, but there was also a more pronounced inflammatory reaction in comparison to test membrane 2, especially in the vicinity of the keratinocytes. The significance of the ectopic calcifications, along with that of the resorption or degradation processes of both tested membranes, must be evaluated in future experimental studies, with different time points after implantation examined.

Keywords: bioengineered skin substitutes, bioresorbable membranes, keratinocytes, submerged healing, tissue response, wound healing