Comparison of the healing process of xenografts with three different sources in critical-size bone defects: An in vivo study.

ABSTRACT

Background: Xenograft bone substitutes can be obtained from different animals and processed using various methods. The present in vivo study evaluated bone regeneration after using three types of xenografts with different sources in critical-sized bone defects in rabbit calvaria. Methods: Four 8-mm defects were created in calvaria of 14 New Zealand and white male rabbits. Three out of four defects were filled with xenografts of bovine, camel, and ostrich sources. The fourth defect was left unfilled as the control group. Seven rabbits were sacrificed after eight weeks and seven others after 12 weeks. Micro-CT imaging and histologic evaluation were further performed on dissected calvarias. Results: After 8 and 12 weeks, the highest and lowest percentages of new bone formation were observed in the camel (27.71% and 41.92%) and control (11.33% and 15.96%) groups, respectively. In the case of residual material, the ostrich group had the most value after eight weeks (53%), while after 12 weeks, it was highest in the camel group (37%). Micro-CT findings were consistent with histologic results. Conclusion: Although all three xenografts can be good choices for treating bone defects, camel-sourced xenograft seemed to be better than the other two groups. The origin and processing procedures of xenografts affected their final characteristics, which should be considered for clinical use.