31 6 2012 12 Chinese Journal of Biomedical Engineering Vol. 31 No. 6 December 2012 Beagle 1 1* 1 2 2 1 401147 2 400016 LIPUS GBR Beagle 5 Beagle 1 /3 5 mm 5 mm Beagle 4 4 LIPUS 90 mw / cm 2 20 min / d LIPUS 90 mw / cm 2 20 min / d + GBR GBR 5 4 Beagle HE Masson Micro-CT NBA NBA% Micro-CT LIPUS + GBR GBR LIPUS Masson GBR LIPUS LIPUS + GBR NBA NBA% LIPUS 0. 39 ± 0. 06 mm 2 7. 74% ± 1. 09% LIPUS + GBR 0. 52 ± 0. 13 mm 2 10. 3% ± 2. 22% GBR 0. 41 ± 0. 11 mm 2 7. 44% ± 2. 20% 0. 24 ± 0. 04 mm 2 4. 64% ± 0. 99% P < 0. 05 LIPUS + GBR GBR LIPUS LIPUS GBR Beagle R781. 4 + 5 A 0258-8021 2012 06-0895-07 Effect of Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound Combined with Guided Bone Regeneration on Canine Periodontal Fenestration Defect in Beagle Dogs GAO Xiang 1 SONG Jin-Lin 1* DENG Feng 1 ZHAO Chun-Liang 2 WANG Zhi-Biao 2 1 The Affiliated Hospital of StomatologyChongqing Medical University Chongqing Research Center for Oral Diseases and Biomedical ScienceChongqing 401147China 2 Key Laboratory of Ultrasound Medical Engineering Chongqing 400016China Abstract The aim of this work is to investigate the effect of combined application of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound LIPUS and guided bone regeneration GBR on canine periodontal fenestration defect in Beagle dogs. In the experimentsfive Beagle dogs were used for establishing 5 mm 5 mm periodontal fenestration defect. Four canines in each dog were randomly divided into LIPUS 90 mw / cm 2 20 min / d grouplipus 90 mw / cm 2 20 min / d + GBR groupgbr group and Control group. Each group had 5 teeth. In order to compare the tissue repair among the groupsthe specimens of periodontal fenestration were obtained for histological analysis HE and Masson staining Micro-CT test and histometric analysis the measurement of new bone areanba and its percentage in initial defect areanba% after 4 weeks. Micro-CT test results showed that the area of new alveolar bone from large to small was LIPUS + GBR groupgbr grouplipus groupand Control group. Histological analysis showed that the Masson staining of new bone in LIPUS and doi 10. 3969 / j. issn. 0258-8021. 2012. 06. 014 2012-06-27 2012-09-14 30870754 2010-2-228 CSTC2010BB5355 * E-mail soongjl@ 163. com
896 31 LIPUS + GBR group was mainly red while GBR and control group was mainly blue. It suggested the new bone collagen in LIPUS group and LIPUS + GBR group was more mature than in GBR group and control group. Histometric analysis showed that NBA and NBA% were 0. 39 mm 2 and 7. 74% in respectively LIPUS group 0. 52 mm 2 and 10. 30% respectively in LIPUS + GBR group 0. 41 mm 2 and 7. 44% respectively in GBR group 0. 24 mm 2 and 4. 64% respectively in Control group. Differences between groups were significant P < 0. 05. It suggested the amount of new alveolar bone from large to small was LIPUS + GBR groupgbr grouplipus groupand Control group. LIPUS combined with guided bone regeneration GBR can promote early repair of periodontal fenestration defect. Key words low-intensity pulsed ultrasound guided bone regeneration beagle dog periodontal fenestration defect repair Beagle 4 4 LIPUS 90 mw / cm 2 20 min / d LIPUS 90 mw / cm 2 20 min / d + GBR 1 GBR 5 1. 1. 2 guided tissue regenerationgtr Ⅱ 005013 guided bone regenerationgbr 2 GBR GTR H50021483 2 ml GTR 10 mg / 3 GBR 2% 6 3 4 1. 1. 3 5-6 polyetrafluoroethyleneptfe low intensity pulsed ultrasoundlipus 100 mw / cm 2 Leica Nikon DXM1200 NIS-Elements 7-13 LIPUS F3. 0 Nikon 8-10 GBR Micro-CT μct80 HP Integrity LIPUS Itanium 2 64 OpenVMS 1. 2 GBR LIPUS Beagle 1. 2. 1 Beagle Micro-CT Ⅱ Beagle LIPUS GBR Beagle LIPUS GBR 2% 75% 1. 5 ml / FP301100 0. 01 mmgoodfellow Cambridge Ltd Leica RM2135 2% 1 5 mm 5 mm 1. 1 1. 1. 1 SSWHP-700 12 ~ 18 beagle 5 7 ~ 11 kg L
6 Beagle 897 15 mm 1 a ~ c 1. 2. 2 GBR PTFE 2 ~ 3 mm 13 4-0 1 d ~ f LIPUS 4 d 80 GBR LIPUS + GBR / d 1 1. 5% 1 Fig. 1 1 a ~ c d ~ f GBR The process of periodontal surgery. a ~ c Fenestration wounds modelingd ~ f GBR operation 1. 2. 3 LIPUS LIPUS 1 Micro-CT 55 kv ISATA 90 mw / cm 2 1. 5 MHz 145 μa 2 048 2 048 12 200 μs 1 khz 20 min / d 14 4 28 d 1 2 4% ph = 7 0. 037 0 mm Micro-CT 3 HP Integrity 64 2 Fig. 2 LIPUS LIPUS treatment 1. 2. 4 Micro-CT 3 4 Beagle Fig. 3 The reconstruction image of canine after scanning
898 31 1. 2. 5 Micro-CT 1. 2. 6 10 mm 10 mm 10% EDTA 37 2 NIS-Elements F3. 0 40 IPP-6. 0 7 5 μm 5 4 HE Masson 4 HE 1 Masson Nikon DXM1200 4 N NC NP NB BM ST Fig. 4 The growth diagram of new periodontal tissue in fenestration defect N notch NC new cementum NP new periodontal ligament NB new bone BM PTFE membrane ST soft tissue 1 total defect area TDA 2 new bone area NBA LSD P < 0. 05 2 2. 1 3 1 PTFE 2 PTFE 3 2. 2 LIPUS + GBR GBR PTFE 1. 2. 7 5 SPSS13. 0 6 ± x 珋 ± s PTFE 5 1 Fig. 5 The size of defect in operation 1 2. 3 Micro-CT Tab. 1 The clinical healing between groups / / / GBR LIPUS 0 1 4 GBR GBR + LIPUS 0 0 5 GBR 1 1 3 GBR 0 0 5
6 Beagle 899 9 10 Masson LIPUS Fig. 6 6 The size of defect after treatment LIPUS + GBR 2. 4 9 PTFE HE 40 2. 4. 1 LIPUS Fig 9 PTFE membrane in vivo HE staining 40 7 8 Masson 10 + GBR HE 40 Fig. 10 Histological performance in LIPUS + GBR group HE staining40 7 HE 200 2. 4. 3 Fig. 7 Cementoblast cells and new cementum HE GBR Staining 200 Masson 2. 4. 4 Masson 11 2. 5 TDA P > 0. 05 NBA% P < 0. 05 8 HE 400 2 Fig. 8 Osteoblasts and new alveolar bone HE staining 200 HE staining400 3 2. 4. 2 LIPUS + GBR PTFE
900 31 11 Fig. 11 a HE 100 b HE 200 cmasson100 Histological performance in control group. a HE staining100 b HE staining200 c Masson staining100 Tab. 2 2 TDANBA NBA% The measurements of TDANBA and NBA% LIPUS n = 4 LIPUS + GBR n = 5 GBR n = 3 n = 5 F P TDA / mm 2 5. 03 ± 0. 31 5. 04 ± 0. 29 5. 50 ± 0. 13 5. 20 ± 0. 33 0. 186 > 0. 05 NBA / mm 2 0. 39 ± 0. 06 0. 52 ± 0. 13 0. 41 ± 0. 11 0. 24 ± 0. 04 9. 48 < 0. 05 NBA / % 7. 74 ± 1. 09 10. 3 ± 2. 22 7. 44 ± 2. 20 4. 64 ± 0. 99 9. 027 < 0. 05 LIPUS + GBR P < 0. 05 GBR P < 0. 05 P < 0. 15 LIPUS GBR Micro-CT 16 5 mm 16 Micro-CT 17 18 LIPUS Beagle Ikai Beagle 4 LIPUS 21 22 LIPUS 11 LIPUS + GBR HE 4 LIPUS Beagle LIPUS GBR Masson Micro-CT 23 LIPUS LIPUS + GBR Masson 19 HP Integrity LIPUS Micro-CT 20 LIPUS LIPUS LIPUS GBR LIPUS + GBR GBR
6 Beagle 901 LIPUS LIPUS + GBR 8. 08% ~ 12. 52% 4 4 LIPUS GBR GBR 1. Beagle J. 201028 5 522-525. periodontology J. J Clin Periodontol199926 6 335-2. M. 3. 2008 264-269. 3 Keles GCSumer MCetinkaya BOet al. Effect of autogenous 340. 17Hjorting-Hansen A. Incomplete bone healing of experimental cortical bone grafting in conjunction with guided tissue cavities in dog mandibles J. British Journal of Oral Surgery regeneration in the treatment of intraosseous periodontal defects 19719 1 33-40. 2005 133-136. 5 Becker WDahlin CBecker BEet al. The use of e-ptfe barrier membranes for bone promotion around titanium implants placed into extraction sockets a prospective multicenter study J. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants19949 131-40 6 Gher MEQuintero GSandifer JBet al. Combined dental implant and guided tissue regeneration therapy in humans J. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent199414 4 332-347 7. Beagle Ⅱ J. the proliferation and differentiation of cementoblast lineage cells 201115 71219-1223. 8. Beagle J. 201243 2 183-187. 9. Beagle J. 201216 5766-769. 10. Beagle J. 201127 11970-973. 11Ikai HTamura TWatanabe Tet al. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates periodontal wound healing after flap surgery J. J Periodont Res200843 2 212-216. 12. BMP-2 J. 2011 20 5767-770. 13. J. 201146 7431-436. 14Kobayashi YSakai DIwashina Tet al. Lou-intensity pulsed ultrasound stimulates cell proliferationproteoglycan synthesis and expression of growth factor-related genes in human nuclesus pulposus cell line J. Eur Cell Mater200917 3 15-22. 15Zimmerman WK. Periodontal repair in dogs supraalveolar defect models for evaluation of safety and efficacy of periodontal reconstructive therapy J. Journal of Periodontology199465 3 1151-1157. 16Weinberg MABral M. Laboratory animal models in 18Caton JMotalGandinil. Non-human primate models for testing J. Eur J Dent20104 4403-411. the efficacy and safety of periodontal regeneration procedures 4 Sato N. M. J. J Periodontol199465 12 1143-1150. 19Assaf A. Ridge splitting technique a 3 - D solution for the thin Maxilla J. Dental Horizons. 20062 11 7-11. 20Ming JiangGe WangMargaret Wet al. Blind Deblurring of Spiral CT Images. IEEE Trans J. Medical Imaging. 200322 8 837-845. 21Sun JuishengHong RCChang W Hong-Shonget al. In vitro effects of low-intensity ultrasound stimulation on the bone cells J. J Biomed Mater Res200157 3 449-456. 22Inubushi TTanaka ERego EBet al. Effects of ultrasound on J. J Periodontal. 200879 10 1984-1990.. Masson J. 200113 11645-646. 23