[Preparation and Osteogenic Effect Study of Small Intestinal Submucosa Sponge].

M Wang,B W Li,S W Wang,Y H Liu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.19723/j.issn.1671-167x.2020.05.027
2020-01-01
Abstract:OBJECTIVE To prepare and evaluate the basic properties in vitro of a novel small intestinal submucosa (SIS) sponge, and to describe the bone formation ability of the SIS sponge in vivo. METHODS The SIS sponge was prepared by freeze-drying method. To evaluate the physicochemical properties of the sponge, electron microscope observation, porosity test, water absorption ability and mechanical property were conducted in vitro. The cytotoxicity of the SIS sponge was performed by cell counting kit-8 method. In vivo experiments, eighteen extraction sockets of premolar of three Beagle dogs were randomly divided into three groups: SIS sponge group (SIS sponge), positive control group (Bio-Oss granules and Bio-Gide membrane) and control group(no treatment). The animals were sacrificed 4 weeks and 12 weeks after operation, and micro computed tomography (Micro-CT) was applied to measure the bone volume fraction (BV/TV) and bone mineralized density (BMD). The data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA. RESULTS The average pore diameter of the SIS sponge was (194.90±30.39) μm, the porosity was 92.31%±0.24%, the water absorption rate was 771.50%±40.90%, and the compressive elastic modulus was (2.20±0.19) kPa. There was no significant difference in cell proliferation ability between SIS sponge and control group (P>0.05). Micro-CT quantitative results showed that BV/TV of SIS sponge group (52.81%±3.21%) and positive control group (58.30%±9.36%) were significantly higher than that of control group (38.65%±4.80%) 4 weeks after operation (P < 0.05). The BMD of SIS sponge group [(887.09±61.02) mg/cm3], positive control group [(952.05±132.78) mg/cm3] and control group [(879.29±74.27) mg/cm3] showed no statistical difference 4 weeks after operation (P>0.05). The BV/TV of positive control group (60.57%± 6.56%) was significantly higher than that of SIS sponge group (47.89%±3.59%) and control group (42.99%±2.54%) 12 weeks after operation (P < 0.05). BMD of SIS sponge group [(1047±89.95) mg/cm3] and positive control group [(1101.37±98.85) mg/cm3] were significantly higher than that of control group [(890.36±79.79) mg/cm3] 12 weeks after operation (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION The SIS sponge has satisfying physicochemical properties and biocompatibility. The SIS sponge significantly increased bone volume fraction in the early stage of bone formation (4 weeks) and bone mineralized density in the late stage of bone formation (12 weeks).
What problem does this paper attempt to address?