Combination of a biomolecule‐aided biphasic cryogel scaffold with a barrier membrane adhering PDGF‐encapsulated nanofibers to promote periodontal regeneration. (24th February 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Huang, Ren‐Yeong; Tai, Wei‐Chiu; Ho, Ming‐Hua; Chang, Po‐Chun
• Is Part Of: Journal of periodontal research. Volume 55:Number 4(2020)
• Page Start: 529
• Page End: 538
• Publication Date: 2020-02-24
• Subjects: growth factor -- guided tissue regeneration -- nanofibers -- periodontal -- tissue scaffolds; Periodontics -- Periodicals; 617.632
• DOI: 10.1111/jre.12740
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0022-3484

Abstract

Abstract: Objective and Background: To achieve periodontal regeneration, numerous investigations have concentrated on biomolecule supplement and optimization of bone substitute or barrier membrane. This study evaluated the benefit of combining these strategies for periodontal regeneration. Methods: Biphasic cryogel scaffold (BCS) composed of gelatin (ligament phase) and gelatin with beta‐tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite (BH) (bone phase) was designed as tested bone substitute, and both enamel matrix derivatives (EMD) and bone morphogenetic protein‐2 (BMP‐2) were applied to formulate a biomolecule‐aided BCS (BBS). Functionally graded membrane (FGM) was designed as tested barrier membrane by adhering PDGF‐encapsulated poly(L‐lactide‐co‐D/L‐lactide) nanofibers on the conventional membrane (CM). BBS and FGM were characterized and tested for biocompatibility in vitro. Thirty 4 × 4 × 5 mm 3 periodontal intrabony defects were created on 6 Beagle dogs. Each defect was evenly assigned to one of the following treatments including BH‐CM, BCS‐CM, BBS‐CM, BH‐FGM, BCS‐FGM, and BBS‐FGM, for 12 weeks. The therapeutic efficiency was assessed by micro‐CT and histology. Results: BCS and FGM sustained the release of biomolecules. The viability of MSCs was maintained in both phases of BCS and was promoted while seeding on the PDGF‐encapsulated nanofibers. In CM‐covered sites, BBS showed significantly greater osteogenesis ( P < .01) and early defect fill ( P < .05) relative to BH. FGM significantly promoted osteogenesis ( P < .05) in BH‐treated sites but showed limited benefit in BBS‐treated sites. On denuded roots, cementum deposition was evident in BBS‐treated sites. Conclusions: PDGF‐loaded FGM promoted periodontal osteogenesis, and BBS with EMD‐BMP‐2 had potential for reconstructing alveolar ridge, periodontal ligament, and cementum. FGM and BBS combination provided limited additional benefit.