<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
Affiliations
Suelen Cristina Sartoretto
Oral Surgery Department, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Natalia de Freitas Gens
Graduate Program, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Rodrigo Figueiredo de Brito Resende
Oral Surgery Department, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Adriana Terezinha Neves Novellino Alves
Laboratory for Clinical Research in Dentistry, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Rafael Cury Cecato
Implant Dentistry Center for Education and Research on Dental Implants (CEPID), Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis 88000-000, Santa Catarina, Brazil
Marcelo José Uzeda
Oral Surgery Department, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Jose Mauro Granjeiro
Laboratory for Clinical Research in Dentistry, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Monica Diuana Calasans-Maia
Laboratory for Clinical Research in Dentistry, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Jose Albuquerque Calasans-Maia
Laboratory for Clinical Research in Dentistry, Dentistry School, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi 24020-140, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
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.
