Influence of Physicochemical Characteristics of Calcium Phosphate-based Biomaterials in Cranio-maxillofacial Bone Regeneration. A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis of Preclinical Models

Overview

Journal Mater Today Bio

Specialty Biomedical Engineering

Date 2024 Jun 10

PMID 38854953

Authors

Ehsan Sadeghian Dehkord

Bruno De Carvalho

Marie Ernst

Adelin Albert

France Lambert

Liesbet Geris

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: Calcium phosphate-based biomaterials (CaP) are the most widely used biomaterials to enhance bone regeneration in the treatment of alveolar bone deficiencies, cranio-maxillofacial and periodontal infrabony defects, with positive preclinical and clinical results reported. This systematic review aimed to assess the influence of the physicochemical properties of CaP biomaterials on the performance of bone regeneration in preclinical animal models.

Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched to retrieve the preclinical studies investigating physicochemical characteristics of CaP biomaterials. The studies were screened for inclusion based on intervention (physicochemical characterization and evaluation) and reported measurable outcomes.

Results: A total of 1532 articles were retrieved and 58 studies were ultimately included in the systematic review. A wide range of physicochemical characteristics of CaP biomaterials was found to be assessed in the included studies. Despite a high degree of heterogeneity, the meta-analysis was performed on 39 studies and evidenced significant effects of biomaterial characteristics on their bone regeneration outcomes. The study specifically showed that macropore size, Ca/P ratio, and compressive strength exerted significant influence on the formation of newly regenerated bone. Moreover, factors such as particle size, Ca/P ratio, and surface area were found to impact bone-to-material contact during the regeneration process. In terms of biodegradability, the amount of residual graft was determined by macropore size, particle size, and compressive strength.

Conclusion: The systematic review showed that the physicochemical characteristics of CaP biomaterials are highly determining for scaffold's performance, emphasizing its usefulness in designing the next generation of bone scaffolds to target higher rates of regeneration.

References

Fitzpatrick V, Martin-Moldes Z, Deck A, Torres-Sanchez R, Valat A, Cairns D . Functionalized 3D-printed silk-hydroxyapatite scaffolds for enhanced bone regeneration with innervation and vascularization. Biomaterials. 2021; 276:120995. PMC: 8408341. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2021.120995. View

Takahashi K . Effect of new bone substitute materials consisting of collagen and tricalcium phosphate. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 2009; 50(1):1-11. DOI: 10.2209/tdcpublication.50.1. View

Madhumathi K, Rubaiya Y, Doble M, Venkateswari R, Kumar T . Antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and bone-regenerative dual-drug-loaded calcium phosphate nanocarriers-in vitro and in vivo studies. Drug Deliv Transl Res. 2018; 8(5):1066-1077. DOI: 10.1007/s13346-018-0532-6. View

Park J, Bae S, Suh J, Lee D, Kim S, Kim H . Evaluation of bone healing with eggshell-derived bone graft substitutes in rat calvaria: a pilot study. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2007; 87(1):203-14. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.31768. View

Suzuki O, Kamakura S, Katagiri T, Nakamura M, Zhao B, Honda Y . Bone formation enhanced by implanted octacalcium phosphate involving conversion into Ca-deficient hydroxyapatite. Biomaterials. 2006; 27(13):2671-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.12.004. View

Youseflee P, Ranjbar F, Bahraminasab M, Ghanbari A, Faradonbeh D, Arab S . Exosome loaded hydroxyapatite (HA) scaffold promotes bone regeneration in calvarial defect: an in vivo study. Cell Tissue Bank. 2022; 24(2):389-400. DOI: 10.1007/s10561-022-10042-4. View

Lambert F, Leonard A, Lecloux G, Sourice S, Pilet P, Rompen E . A comparison of three calcium phosphate-based space fillers in sinus elevation: a study in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013; 28(2):393-402. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.2332. View

Lee J, Ryu M, Baek H, Lee K, Seo J, Lee H . Fabrication and evaluation of porous beta-tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite (60/40) composite as a bone graft extender using rat calvarial bone defect model. ScientificWorldJournal. 2014; 2013:481789. PMC: 3878745. DOI: 10.1155/2013/481789. View

Janicki P, Schmidmaier G . What should be the characteristics of the ideal bone graft substitute? Combining scaffolds with growth factors and/or stem cells. Injury. 2011; 42 Suppl 2:S77-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.06.014. View

10.

Koizumi T, Komuro Y . Influence of mixing blood with calcium phosphate bone paste on hardening. J Craniofac Surg. 2011; 22(1):329-32. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181f7df69. View

11.

Sakkas A, Wilde F, Heufelder M, Winter K, Schramm A . Autogenous bone grafts in oral implantology-is it still a "gold standard"? A consecutive review of 279 patients with 456 clinical procedures. Int J Implant Dent. 2017; 3(1):23. PMC: 5453915. DOI: 10.1186/s40729-017-0084-4. View

12.

de Misquita M, Bentini R, Goncalves F . The performance of bone tissue engineering scaffolds in in vivo animal models: A systematic review. J Biomater Appl. 2016; 31(5):625-636. DOI: 10.1177/0885328216656476. View

13.

Sadeghian Dehkord E, Kerckhofs G, Compere P, Lambert F, Geris L . An Empirical Model Linking Physico-Chemical Biomaterial Characteristics to Intra-Oral Bone Formation. J Funct Biomater. 2023; 14(7). PMC: 10381523. DOI: 10.3390/jfb14070388. View

14.

Trajkovski B, Jaunich M, Muller W, Beuer F, Zafiropoulos G, Houshmand A . Hydrophilicity, Viscoelastic, and Physicochemical Properties Variations in Dental Bone Grafting Substitutes. Materials (Basel). 2018; 11(2). PMC: 5848912. DOI: 10.3390/ma11020215. View

15.

Seo S, Kim Y . Improved bone regeneration using collagen-coated biphasic calcium phosphate with high porosity in a rabbit calvarial model. Biomed Mater. 2020; 16(1):015012. DOI: 10.1088/1748-605X/abb1fc. View

16.

Thrivikraman G, Athirasala A, Twohig C, Boda S, Bertassoni L . Biomaterials for Craniofacial Bone Regeneration. Dent Clin North Am. 2017; 61(4):835-856. PMC: 5663293. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2017.06.003. View

17.

Dewey M, Harley B . Biomaterial design strategies to address obstacles in craniomaxillofacial bone repair. RSC Adv. 2021; 11(29):17809-17827. PMC: 8443006. DOI: 10.1039/d1ra02557k. View

18.

Ghayor C, Bhattacharya I, Guerrero J, Ozcan M, Weber F . 3D-Printed HA-Based Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration: Microporosity, Osteoconduction and Osteoclastic Resorption. Materials (Basel). 2022; 15(4). PMC: 8875550. DOI: 10.3390/ma15041433. View

19.

Kinoshita Y, Maeda H . Recent developments of functional scaffolds for craniomaxillofacial bone tissue engineering applications. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013; 2013:863157. PMC: 3791836. DOI: 10.1155/2013/863157. View

20.

Smith B, Santoro M, Grosfeld E, Shah S, van den Beucken J, Jansen J . Incorporation of fast dissolving glucose porogens into an injectable calcium phosphate cement for bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater. 2016; 50:68-77. PMC: 6660643. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.12.024. View