Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comparison of ready-made and self-setting alginate membranes used as a barrier membrane for guided bone regeneration

  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to understand the requirements of guided bone regeneration (GBR) involving alginate base self-setting barrier membranes, GBR was performed in the case of bicortical bone defects formed at the tibiae of experimental animals employing self-setting and ready-made alginate membranes. Connective tissue ingress into the bone defects at the skin side of the tibia was observed when GBR was generated utilizing ready-made alginate membrane. In contrast, bone defects were reconstructed with bone tissue when GBR was generated with self-setting alginate membrane formed from aqueous 3% sodium alginate and 3% CaCl2 solutions. The unreacted aqueous sodium alginate solution inherent to self-setting alginate membrane did not inhibit bone tissue regeneration. Rather, callus bone was formed using sodium alginate as the nucleus. However, when GBR was effected with self-setting alginate membrane formed from aqueous 10% CaCl2 solution, membrane was too thick and thus regeneration of bone tissue in the bone cavity was prevented. Therefore, we concluded that self-setting alginate membrane is very useful as a barrier membrane for GBR upon appropriate adjustment of conditions with respect to preparation of alginate membrane.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. K. ISHIKAWA, Y. UEYAMA, T. MANO, T. KOYAMA, K. SUZUKI, T. and T. MATSUMURA, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 47(2) (2002) 111.

  2. Y. UEYAMA, K. ISHIKAWA, T. MANO, T. KOYAMA, H. NAGATSUKA, K. SUZUKI and K. RYOKE, Biomaterials 23(9) (2002) 2027.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. J. H. LEE, W. G. KIM, S. S. KIM, J. H. LE and H. B. LEE, J. Biomed. Mate. Res. 36(2) (1997) 200.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. S. H. YUK, S. H. CHO and H. B. LEE, Pharm. Res. 9(7) (1992) 955.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. A. LINDE, P. ALBERIUS, C. DAHLIN, K. BJURSTAM and Y. SUNDIN, J. Periodontol 64(11) (1993) 1116.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. M. SIMION, A. SCARANO, L. GIONSO and A. PIATTELLI, Int. J. Oral. Maxillofac. Implants. 11(6) (1996) 735.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. J. T. MELLONIG, M. NEVINS and R. SANCHEZ, Int. J. Periodont. Rest. Dent. 18(2) (1998) 129.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. B. BOYCE, in “Biologic and Synthetic Vascular Prostheses,” J. C. Stanly (ed), (Grune & Stratton, New York, 1982) p. 555.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoshiya Ueyama.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ueyama, Y., Koyama, T., Ishikawa, K. et al. Comparison of ready-made and self-setting alginate membranes used as a barrier membrane for guided bone regeneration. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 17, 281–288 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-006-7315-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-006-7315-1

Keywords

Navigation