Bone Graft

Why use the porcine bone graft Smartgraft?

Smartgraft is a bone substitute that balances high porosity with stable volume remodeling [1,2]. The high porosity and large pores enhance vascularization, bone ingrowth, and osteointegration of the implant after surgery [3,4].

What makes Smartgraft special?

Regenerative Capability

Native porcine bone graft provides a human-like structure for balanced remodelling [5].

Cell Adhesion

The rough surface of human-like porcine particles facilitates the attachment of new cells [1,2].

Cell Migration / Infiltration

Smartgraft’s high porosity and large pores enhance vascularization, bone ingrowth, and osteointegration of the implant after surgery. The anorganic bone mineral matrix has interconnections that reduce the bulk density of the graft, and allows for more void space for the growth of new bones [10]. Smartgraft’s macropores range from 0.1mm to 1.0mm.

Its native porous carbonate apatite, preserved through the proprietary production process, possesses the natural pore structure for cell conduction.

How to use Smartgraft?

3 Minute Sticky Bone

[trp_language language=”en_US”]

[/trp_language]

[trp_language language=”fr_FR”]

[/trp_language]

[trp_language language=”it_IT”]

[/trp_language]

[trp_language language=”de_DE”]

[/trp_language]

GBR prior to implant placement (Prof D. Bozic)

+7+9

How does Smartgraft work?

• As a porcine-derived bone, Smartgraft accelerates alveolar bone healing as compared to Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral (DBBM) [12,13].
• The proprietary purification process preserves carbonate apatite [6] which has been shown to increase the bone-forming activities of osteogenic cells and to enhance bioresorption of the porcine bone graft by osteoclasts [7-11].
• The biocompatibility is supported by the proprietary purification process of the porcine bone graft [6].

[trp_language language=”en_US”]

[/trp_language]

[trp_language language=”fr_FR”]

[/trp_language]

[trp_language language=”it_IT”]

[/trp_language]

[trp_language language=”de_DE”]

[/trp_language]

Literature

1. Deligianni DD, Katsala ND, Koutsoukos PG, Missirlis YF, Effect of Surface Roughness of Hydroxyapatite on Human Bone Marrow Cell Adhesion, Proliferation, Differentiation and Detachment Strength. Elsevier Biomaterials 22 (2001) 87–96
2. Shu-Thung L et al. (2014) Isolation and Characterization of a Porous Carbonate Apatite From Porcine Cancellous Bone. Science, Technology, Innovation, Aug: 1-13 (data on file)
3. Saghiri MA, Asatourian A, Garcia-Godoy F, Sheibani N. The role of angiogenesis in implant dentistry part II: The effect of bone-grafting and barrier membrane materials on angiogenesis. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2016 Jul 1;21(4):e526-37. doi: 10.4317/medoral.21200. PMID: 27031074; PMCID: PMC4920468.
4. Data on file
5. Bracey DN, Seyler TM, Jinnah AH, Lively MO, Willey JS, Smith TL, et al. A decellularized porcine xenograft-derived bone scaffold for clinical use as a bone graft substitute: a critical evaluation of processing and structure. J Funct Biomater. 2018;9(3):45.https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb9030045.
6. Method of Preparing Porous Carbonate Apatite from Natural Bone. United States Patent US 8,980,328
7. Landi E., Celotti G., Logroscino G., Tampieri A. 2003. Carbonated Hydroxyapatite as Bone Substitute. Journal of the European Ceramic Society 23: 2931–2937.  
8. Spense G., Patel N., Brooks R., Rushton N. 2009. Carbonate Substituted Hydroxyapatite: Resorption by Osteoclasts Modifies the Osteoblastic Response. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A 217-224.
9. Doi Y, Shibutani T, Moriwaki Y, Kajimoto T, Iwayama Y. Sintered carbonate apatites as bioresorbable bone substitutes. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;39:603–610
10. Hasegawa M, Doi Y, Uchida A. Cell-mediated bioresorption of sintered carbonate apatite in rabbits. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2003;85:142–147.
11. Spense G., Patel N., Brooks R., Rushton N. 2009. Carbonate Substituted Hydroxyapatite: Resorption by Osteoclasts Modifies the Osteoblastic Response. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A 217-224.
12. Renzo et al.: Tissue Dimensional Changes Following Alveolar Ridge Preservation with Different Xenografts Associated with a Collagen Membrane. Results at the 4-Month Re-Entry Surgery. Int Arch Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2017, 1:003
13. Guarnieri R, Di Nardo D, Di Giorgio G, Miccoli G, Testarelli L. Effectiveness of Xenograft and Porcine-Derived Resorbable Membrane in Augmentation of Posterior Extraction Sockets with a Severe Wall Defect. A Radiographic/Tomographic Evaluation. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2019 Mar 31;10(1):e3. doi: 10.5037/jomr.2019.10103. PMID: 31086644; PMCID: PMC6498814.