Membranes (Jul 2022)

<i>In Vivo</i> Evaluation of Permeable and Impermeable Membranes for Guided Bone Regeneration

  • Suelen Cristina Sartoretto,
  • Natalia de Freitas Gens,
  • Rodrigo Figueiredo de Brito Resende,
  • Adriana Terezinha Neves Novellino Alves,
  • Rafael Cury Cecato,
  • Marcelo José Uzeda,
  • Jose Mauro Granjeiro,
  • Monica Diuana Calasans-Maia,
  • Jose Albuquerque Calasans-Maia

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12070711
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 7
p. 711

Abstract

Read online

Background: The degree of biodegradation and the inflammatory response of membranes employed for guided bone regeneration directly impact the outcome of this technique. This study aimed to evaluate four different experimental versions of Poly (L-lactate-co-Trimethylene Carbonate) (PTMC) + Poly (L-lactate-co-glycolate) (PLGA) membranes, implanted in mouse subcutaneous tissue, compared to a commercially available membrane and a Sham group. Methods: Sixty Balb-C mice were randomly divided into six experimental groups and subdivided into 1, 3, 6 and 12 weeks (n = 5 groups/period). The membranes (1 cm2) were implanted in the subcutaneous back tissue of the animals. The samples were obtained for descriptive and semiquantitative histological evaluation (ISO 10993-6). Results: G1 and G4 allowed tissue adhesion and the permeation of inflammatory cells over time and showed greater phagocytic activity and permeability. G2 and G3 detached from the tissue in one and three weeks; however, in the more extended periods, they presented a rectilinear and homogeneous aspect and were not absorbed. G2 had a major inflammatory reaction. G5 was almost completely absorbed after 12 weeks. Conclusions: The membranes are considered biocompatible. G5 showed a higher degree of biosorption, followed by G1 and G4. G2 and G3 are considered non-absorbable in the studied periods.

Keywords