Histological comparison of autograft, allograft-DBM, xenograft, and synthetic grafts in a trabecular bone defect: an experimental study in rabbits.

BACKGROUND

Different types of bone-graft substitutes have been developed and are on the market worldwide to eliminate the drawbacks of autogenous grafting. This experimental animal study was undertaken to evaluate the different histological properties of various bone graft substitutes utilized in this hospital.

MATERIAL/METHODS: Ninety New Zealand white rabbits were divided into six groups of 15 animals. Under general anesthesia, a 4.5 mm-wide hole was drilled into both the lateral femoral condyles of each rabbit, for a total of 180 condyles for analysis. The bone defects were filled with various grafts, these being 1) autograft, 2) DBM crunch allograft (Grafton), 3) bovine cancellous bone xenograft (Lubboc), 4) calcium phosphate hydroxyapatite substitute (Ceraform), 5) calcium sulfate substitute (Osteoset), and 6) no filling (control). The animals were sacrificed at 1, 3, and 6 months after implantation and tissue samples from the implanted areas were processed for histological evaluation. A histological grading scale was designed to determine the different histological parameters of bone healing.

RESULTS

The highest histological grades were achieved with the use of cancellous bone autograft. Bovine xenograft (Lubboc) was the second best in the histological scale grading. The other substitutes (Grafton, Ceraform, Osteoset) had similar scores but were inferior to both allograft and xenograft.

CONCLUSIONS

Bovine xenograft showed better biological response than the other bone graft substitutes; however, more clinical studies are necessary to determine its overall effectiveness.