[Investigation about the clinical use of brushite- and hydroxylapatite-cement in sheep]

For future clinical use as synthetic bone replacement, an injectable brushite-(chronOS-Inject) and hydroxylapatite-(Biobon) cement were compared in a drill hole model in 10 sheep over time at 2, 4, 6, 8, 16 and 24 weeks. Results were compared regarding their practical use, biocompatibiliy, resorption mechanism and subsequent new bone formation. The cements were filled into drill holes (psi 8 x 13mm) of the proximal and distal humerus, and femur and the samples evaluated macroscopically, radiologically and microscopically including histomorphometrical quantification of percentages of new bone, fibrous tissue and remnants of cements. The cement area decreased continuously from 2 to 24 weeks with chronOS-Inject, as well as the area of granules. Inversely, the subsequent new bone formation increased from 2-24 weeks accordingly. With Biobon the cement area decreased slower between 2 and 24 weeks, and the new bone formation was less. Both cements were well integrated into the bone in long bones. chronOS-Inject demonstrated good biocompatibility and was almost completely replaced through bone within 24 weeks. Biobon was resorbed considerably slower and initially a slight inflammatory reaction including bone resorption was observed within the adjacent host bone.