ABSTRACT
The effects of bone graft materials on the inflammatory response and biochemical markers of bone remodeling were studied on a rabbit model of fracture augmentation with the following grafts: ß-tricalcium phosphate, demineralized bone matrix, nanostructured carbon implant, and porous titanium implant made by additive 3D printing. The markers of bone remodeling and the blood system response in the postoperative period were studied. It was found that porous titanium implant and ß-tricalcium phosphate induced osteogenesis and minimized osteoclastic resorption. Augmentation with nanostructured carbon implant and demineralized bone matrix stimulated the processes of osteoclastic resorption.
Subject(s)
Biocompatible Materials/pharmacology , Bone Transplantation/methods , Calcium Phosphates/pharmacology , Cementoplasty/methods , Intra-Articular Fractures/therapy , Osseointegration/drug effects , Titanium/pharmacology , Alkaline Phosphatase/blood , Alkaline Phosphatase/genetics , Animals , Biomarkers/metabolism , Bone Demineralization Technique , Bone Matrix/chemistry , Bone Remodeling , Bone Resorption/metabolism , Carbon/metabolism , Carbon/pharmacology , Collagen Type I/blood , Collagen Type I/genetics , Female , Intra-Articular Fractures/metabolism , Intra-Articular Fractures/surgery , Nanostructures/chemistry , Osseointegration/physiology , Osteocalcin/blood , Osteocalcin/genetics , Peptides/blood , Peptides/genetics , Porosity , Rabbits , Tibia/drug effects , Tibia/injuries , Tibia/metabolism , Tibia/surgeryABSTRACT
AIM: To improve surgical treatment of bicondylar tibial fractures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Outcomes of 69 victims were analyzed. Two groups were compared to assess an efficacy of surgical techiques (two-stage surgery, osteosynthesis under joint distraction, combination of new L-shaped external and L-shaped internal approaches, osteoplasty with b-tricalcium phosphate, carbon nanostructured implant and xenoplastic material "Osteomatrix"). CONCLUSION: Efficacy of treatment was higher in the main group compared with control group (50 and 27.6% respectively).
