Methods: 72 implants, divided in 6 groups: HA/TCP, HA/TCP+rPRP, HA/TCP+gPRP, HA/TCP+hPRP, HB and HB+hPRP (n=6) were inserted in critical-sized cranial defects (8mm in diameter) of immunodeficient rats. After 2 and 4 weeks of implantation, descriptive and quantitative histology (parameters: tissue response at bone-implant interface, hard tissue response in between particles, bone fill in vertical direction, defect closure and direction of bone formation), and microCT analyses (degree of bone union, volume of newly formed bone and bone fill in %) were performed. Data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Poisson regression (p<0.05).
Results: Histological and microCT findings showed that HA/TCP+rPRP and HA/TCP+gPRP did not enhance bone regeneration compared to HA/TCP at both time points. In contrast, hPRP+HA/TCP demonstrated significantly increased microCT bone fill % compared to HA/TCP (p<0.001). Similarly, at 2 weeks the volume of newly formed bone for HB+hPRP (18%±2) was significantly higher than the bone volume for HB (14%±1) (p<0.01). At 4 weeks this difference was not significant. HB+hPRP demonstrated enhanced bone healing compared to HA/TCP+hPRP at both evaluation periods.
Conclusions: Rat and goat PRP had no effect on bone formation. Human PRP had additional effect on human bone graft only after 2 weeks. Human PRP combined with human bone graft had better osteogenic capacity than human PRP combined with a synthetic bone substitute.