Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 20, 2026
Use of Human Perivascular Stem Cells for Bone Regeneration
Published on: May 25, 2012
Guided bone regeneration using cyanoacrylate-combined calcium phosphate in a dehiscence defect: a histologic study in
Jung-Seok Lee1, Seung-Hee Ko, Young-Taek Kim
1Department of Periodontology, Research Institute for Periodontal Regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
Purpose:
This study evaluated the effects of cyanoacrylate-combined calcium phosphate (CCP) as a candidate for a barrier membrane substitute in guided bone regeneration and the space maintenance capability of CCP placed in a dehiscence defect model.
Materials And Methods:
Six standardized dehiscence defects (5 × 3 mm, height × width) around dental implants were created on unilateral edentulous ridges in 5 dogs, where each defect was treated with sham surgery, biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP), CCP, barrier membrane (MEM), BCP + MEM, and CCP + MEM. The animals were sacrificed after an 8-week healing interval for histologic and histometric analyses.
Results:
The BCP and CCP sites showed increased bone formation compared with the control sites, although incomplete defect resolution occurred; bone regeneration heights (area) averaged 3.52 ± 0.69 mm (4.94 ± 2.59 mm(2)), 3.51 ± 0.16 mm (4.10 ± 1.99 mm(2)), and 1.53 ± 0.42 mm (1.01 ± 0.74 mm(2)) for the BCP, CCP, and control sites, respectively. All the MEM sites showed more bone formation compared with the sites that received the same biomaterials without a MEM, and the BCP + MEM and CCP + MEM sites showed extensive bone formation within the defect and on top of the implant; the bone regeneration heights (area) averaged 3.96 ± 2.86 mm (12.46 ± 11.61 mm(2)), 5.45 ± 0.25 mm (11.63 ± 1.97 mm(2)), and 2.62 ± 0.27 mm (3.43 ± 0.98 mm(2)) for the BCP + MEM, CCP + MEM, and MEM sites, respectively.
Conclusions:
CCP can be a good scaffold for supporting an MEM as opposed to acting as a substitute for the MEM in guided bone regeneration.
