Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026

Calvarial Model of Bone Augmentation in Rabbit for Assessment of Bone Growth and Neovascularization in Bone Substitution Materials
Published on: August 13, 2019
Polycaprolactone Impregnated 3D Printed Nanohydroxyapatite for Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Poommarin Thammanoonkul1, Suwit Limpattamapanee2, Faungchat Thammarakcharoen3
1Center for Implant Dentistry and Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry and Research Unit in Innovations in Periodontics, Oral Surgery and Advanced Technology in Implant Dentistry, Thammasat University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Objective:
To compare the effect of polycaprolactone impregnated 3D printed nano-hydroxyapatite (3DPHA-PCL) with bovine bone substitute material (BB) in lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation (MSFE).
Materials And Methods:
Lateral MSFE with two bone substitute materials was randomly performed in two centers: group BB (n = 11 sinuses) or group 3DPHA-PCL (n = 11 sinuses). Lateral MSFE with two bone substitute materials was performed on 21 participants across two centers, resulting in a total of 22 sinuses analyzed. The sinuses were randomly allocated into two groups: group BB (11 sinuses) and group 3DPHA-PCL (11 sinuses). Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was taken before (T0) and immediately after MSFE (T1), at 6 months (implant placement; T2), and 1 year (T3). Dimensional stability of the augmentation was analyzed using serial CBCT scans. At the time of implant placement, bone core biopsy was performed, followed by microcomputed tomographic (micro-CT) and histomorphometric analyses.
Results:
Based on the superimposed CBCT images between T1 and T2, the augmented height and volume decreased in both groups without a statistically significant difference between the groups (-0.48 ± 1.01 mm, -53.9 ± 117.8 mm3 in group BB vs. -0.39 ± 0.44 mm, -40.8 ± 101.2 mm3 in group 3DPHA-PCL, p > 0.05). The percentage of newly formed bone was statistically significantly lower in group 3DPHA-PCL (15.7 ± 7.5% histomorphometrically, 16.7 ± 7.5% in micro-CT) than group BB (25.6 ± 7.2%, 26.3 ± 4.1%) (p < 0.05 in both methods). Two implants failed in the 3DPHA-PCL group, while no failures in the BB group.
Conclusions:
Dimensional stability of the augmented bone was comparable between the groups. However, group 3DPHA-PCL demonstrated inferior new bone formation and implant survival compared to group BB. Long-term follow-up is warranted to monitor the behavior of 3DPHA-PCL.

