Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 24, 2026
Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration
Published on: November 16, 2018
Efficacy and safety of porous hydroxyapatite/type 1 collagen composite implantation for bone regeneration: A
Shinichi Sotome1, Keisuke Ae2, Atsushi Okawa2
1Department of Orthopaedic Research and Development, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Orthopaedic and Spinal Surgery, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Background:
Porous hydroxyapatite/collagen composite (HAp/Col) is a bioresorbable bone substitute composed of nano-scale HAp and porcine type 1 collagen. In this study, the efficacy and safety were assessed in comparison to commercially available porous β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP).
Methods:
Patients with bone defects caused by benign bone tumors, fractures, or harvesting of autografts were randomly allocated for implantation of porous HAp/Col (n = 63) or porous β-TCP (n = 63). X-ray images were scored and used to evaluate the efficacy of the implantation until 24 weeks after surgery. Blood tests and observation of the surgical site were also performed to evaluate the safety of the implants. In total, 59 and 60 cases were analyzed in the porous HAp/Col and β-TCP groups, respectively.
Results:
At 18 and 24 weeks after surgery, the highest grade of bone regeneration was more frequent in the porous HAp/Col group than in the porous β-TCP group (p = 0.0004 and 0.0254 respectively). Wilcoxon's rank sum test confirmed the superiority of porous HAp/Col from early time points onward (p = 0.0084, 4 w; p = 0.0037, 8 w; p = 0.0030, 12 w; p < 0.0001, 18 w; and p = 0.0316, 24 w). The incidence of adverse effects was higher in the porous HAp/Col group than in the β-TCP group. However, no serious adverse events were reported and no cases needed to drop out of the clinical trial.
Conclusions:
The superiority of porous HAp/Col for bone regeneration in comparison to an established porous β-TCP was confirmed. Although the incidence of side effects associated with the porous HAp/Col implant was higher than that in the β-TCP group, no serious adverse events occurred that resulted in rejection of the implants.
More Related Videos
06:05Author Spotlight: Enhancing Bone Regeneration with Vascularized Artificial Cartilage Integration
Published on: July 14, 2023
08:41Calvarial Model of Bone Augmentation in Rabbit for Assessment of Bone Growth and Neovascularization in Bone Substitution Materials
Published on: August 13, 2019