Journal of Oral Science
Online ISSN : 1880-4926
Print ISSN : 1343-4934
ISSN-L : 1343-4934
Original
Physico-chemical characterization and biocompatibility evaluation of hydroxyapatites
Ariadne Cristiane Cabral da CruzMárcia Thaís PochapskiJosélia Borba DaherJosé Caetano Zurita da SilvaGibson Luiz PilattiFábio André Santos
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

2006 Volume 48 Issue 4 Pages 219-226

Details
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the physico-chemical and biocompatibility characteristics of two different hydroxyapatites. Physical and chemical properties were analyzed using granulometric analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy-dispersion (EDX), X-ray fuorescence (XRF) and X-ray diffraction (XRD). Biomaterials were implanted into the subcutaneous tissue on the dorsum of 36 Wistar rats, divided into the following groups: Group 1 – Gen-Ox™ (natural); Group 2 – HA-U (synthetic) and Group 3 – Control (Sham). After 15 and 30 days, 6 animals/period were sacrificed and the subcutaneous tissue was taken for histological and histometric analysis, giving consideration to inflammatory reaction and granule area. The granulometric test results showed a mean granule diameter of 161.6 μm (min = 19.0 μm; max = 498.0 μm) and 48.7μm (min = 7.0 μm; max = 256.0 μm) for groups 1 and 2 respectively. Analysis with SEM demonstrated irregular and sharp-edge particles in group 1 (3332.8 ± 274.3 μm2) and irregular and rounded particles in group 2 (1320.8 ± 83.0 μm2) (P < 0.0001; Student's t test). EDX and XRF revealed calcium, carbon, oxygen, sodium and phosphorus in both groups. XRD indicated that both biomaterials were pure and crystalline. There was a statistically significant difference in granule area between the two groups after 15 days (P = 0.022; Student's t-test). After 15 days, an increased inflammatory response was seen in group 2 (P < 0.0001; ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test) whereas it was more pronounced in group 1 after 30 days (P < 0.0001; ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test). It was concluded that these biomaterials have similar physical, chemical and biocompatibility characteristics. (J. Oral Sci. 48, 219-226, 2006)
Content from these authors
© 2006 by Nihon University School of Dentistry
Previous article Next article
feedback
Top