About this Medicine article

Biomaterials for facial bone augmentation: Comparative studies by June Wilson; G. E. Merwin is a Medicine article available to read on EtoBox.

Presently no material is available which is entirely satisfactory for facial bone augmentation. These studies examine several of those already in clinical use, made from various polymers in solid, porous, and woven forms. Homograft bone has also been studied, as an implant material. All materials were used in situations for which they are currently recommended clinically. Bioglass (Bioglass is a trademark of the University of Florida) implants, which are suggested for clinical USE, have been studied in the same model and results show that their surface activity provides a more satisfactory immobilization, both in the short and long term, than does the tissue ingrowth on which most of the other materials depend. Results show that in this model as well as in clinical practice, porous and woven materials provoke in tissues a continuing cellular response which will always compromise long-term clinical success. Autograft bone has associated morbidity and is unpredictable with respect to its incorporation into host tissue and persistance at the site. Bioglass, however, was immobilized successfully at both hard and soft tissue interfaces without the need for porosity, could be satisfactor

Author

June Wilson; G. E. Merwin

Publisher

John Wiley and Sons; Wiley (John Wiley & Sons); Heterocorporation; Wiley (ISSN 0021-9304)

Published

1988

Language

EN

Field

Medicine (Health Sciences)