Periostal Reconstruction Using New Porcine Microstructured Collagen Membrane and Calcium Phosphate Cement: A Dog Model


Article Preview

The aim of this study was to evaluate the capacity of the association of calcium phosphate cement with collagen membrane for large segmental bone defect. Six adult beagle dog underwent defect creation in the ulna and was reconstructed with combination of macroporous calcium phosphate cement MCPC® and resorbable collagen membrane EZ Cure®. After 6 months of implantation, the samples were analyzed with Micro CT, light microscopy and SEM using BSE. Bridging of the defect with a lamellar and well organized bone was achieved in all animals. MCPC granules resorption was increased at the extremities of the implant. Collagen membrane at the expense of the implant was replaced by periosteum-like formation. The results demonstrate the ability of the composite to reconstruct large segmental and critical size defect in long bone.



Key Engineering Materials (Volumes 396-398)

Main Theme:

Edited by:

Marcelo Prado and Cecília Zavaglia




F. Jegoux et al., "Periostal Reconstruction Using New Porcine Microstructured Collagen Membrane and Calcium Phosphate Cement: A Dog Model", Key Engineering Materials, Vols. 396-398, pp. 257-260, 2009

Online since:

October 2008




[1] Daculsi G, Laboux O, Malard O, Weiss P. Current state of the art of biphasic calcium phosphate bioceramics. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 14(3) (2003), 195-200.

[2] Gauthier O, Khairoun I, Bosco J, Obadia L, Bourges X, Rau C, et al. Noninvasive bone replacement with a new injectable calcium phosphate biomaterial. J Biomed Mater Res A. 66(1) (2003), 47-54.


[3] Kenny SM, Buggy M. Bone cements and fillers: a review. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 14(11) (2003), 923-38.

[4] Daculsi G, Khairoun I, LeGeros RZG, Moreau F, Pilet P, Bourges X, et al. Bone Ingrowth at The Expense of a Novel Macroporous Calcium Phosphate Cement. Key Engineering Materials. 330-332(2007), 811-4.


[5] Fritz ME, Lemons JE, Jeffcoat M, Braswell LD, Reddy M. Evaluation of consecutively placed unloaded root-form and plate-form implants in adult Macaca mulatta monkeys. J Periodontol. 65(8) (1994), 788-95.


[6] Eisig SB, Ho V, Kraut R, Lalor P. Alveolar ridge augmentation using titanium micromesh: an experimental study in dogs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 61(3) (2003), 347-53.


[7] von Arx T, Cochran DL, Hermann JS, Schenk RK, Buser D. Lateral ridge augmentation using different bone fillers and barrier membrane application. A histologic and histomorphometric pilot study in the canine mandible. Clin Oral Implants Res. 12(3) (2001).


[8] Hurzeler MB, Kohal RJ, Naghshbandi J, Mota LF, Conradt J, Hutmacher D, et al. Evaluation of a new bioresorbable barrier to facilitate guided bone regeneration around exposed implant threads. An experimental study in the monkey. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 27(4) (1998).


[9] Zahedi S, Legrand R, Brunel G, Albert A, Dewe W, Coumans B, et al. Evaluation of a diphenylphosphorylazide-crosslinked collagen membrane for guided bone regeneration in mandibular defects in rats. J Periodontol. 69(11) (1998), 1238-46.


[10] Hammerle CH, Lang NP. Single stage surgery combining transmucosal implant placement with guided bone regeneration and bioresorbable materials. Clin Oral Implants Res. 12(1) (2001), 9-18.


[11] Zitzmann NU, Naef R, Scharer P. Resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes in combination with Bio-Oss for guided bone regeneration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 12(6) (1997), 844-52.

[12] Zellin G. Growth factors and bone regeneration. Implications of barrier membranes. Swed Dent J Suppl. 129(1998), 7-65.

[13] von Arx T, Broggini N, Jensen SS, Bornstein MM, Schenk RK, Buser D. Membrane durability and tissue response of different bioresorbable barrier membranes: a histologic study in the rabbit calvarium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 20(6) (2005).