Evaluating the efficacy of eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite (EHA) and synthetic hydroxyapatite (SHA) in bone regeneration of maxillofacial defects-a randomized double-blind pilot comparative clinical-radiological study.

BACKGROUND

Defects of the maxillofacial skeleton lead to functional, aesthetic, social, and behavioral problems, that make the person isolate from the mainstream of society. So, bone regeneration is needed for the overall health. Since long time various materials have been used for bone regeneration with limitations. Recently, Eggshell derived hydroxyapatite [EHA] has been explored as a graft substitute. Hence EHA is evaluated and compared with SHA (synthetic hydroxyapatite) for its efficacy to accelerate bone regeneration in maxillofacial cystic defects.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

Total of 20 bony defects randomly allocated to SHA and EHA groups for grafting after removal of pathology (cyst and granuloma) having ≤ 2 cm in size. Signs and symptoms were evaluated postsurgically for 2 weeks. Bone regeneration was assessed by blinded observer for study duration and method of intervention postoperatively at1st, 2nd, 4th, and 6th month and 1 year.

RESULTS

The study found no statistical significant difference among clinical signs and symptoms between the groups. Whereas EHA showed better bone regeneration by the end of 6th month and 1 year compared to SHA with statistically significant difference in bone density[EHA group (136.04 ± 15.56) and SHA group (115.58 ± 16.26)]. Parameters like internal portion of surgical site, surgical site outline showed consistent results with density.

CONCLUSION

Both EHA and SHA graft materials are equally efficient in early bone regeneration. The EHA showed promising results and enhanced bone regeneration with osteoconductivity, which indicates the eggshell waste-bio mineral is worthwhile raw material for the production of HA and is Go Green procedure. EHA is economic, compared with SHA.