Implai Professionals Products
Ossylbone™ is a fully biocompatible, biodegradable and safe material that mimics the natural bone structure and by that it can effectively support the regeneration of the bone tissue. Ossylbone™ biomimetic bone substitute is composed of hydroxyapatite (HAp) (75%) and tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) (25%), resembling the inorganic phaseof bone tissue extracellular matrix.
The Ossylbone™ as an alloplast material is a bone substitute material obtained through laboratory chemical synthesis, what guarantee its full control over its chemical and physical properties. As a result of its origin, Ossylbone™ can be produced in a vast range of forms, resulting in a broad range of applications. Ossylbone™ material is accessible in a form of three-dimensional structures (i.e. granules, blocks) and setting paste with chitosan. 
Ossylbone™ bone substitute material can be applied in every surgical circumstances where bone augmentation is required so in trauma and spinal surgery as well as in dental procedures, both in veterinary and human medicine.

The unique combination of HAp and β-TCP in Ossylbone™ biomimetic bone substitute material creates an optimal scaffold with porosity and mechanical strength similar to natural bone and granting gradual resorption and adequate replacement by newly formed tissue1,2,3.
  1. Kaplan, F. S., Hayes, W. C., Keaveny, T. M., Boskey, A., Einhorn, T. A., & Iannotti, J. P. (1994). Form and function of bone. Orthopaedic basic science, 1, 127-74.
  2. Rodríguez, C., Jean, A., Mitja, S., & Daculsi, G. (2008). Five years clinical follow up bone regeneration with CaP bioceramics. Key Engineering Materials, 361, 1339-1342.
  3. Uzeda, M. J., de Brito Resende, R. F., Sartoretto, S. C., Alves, A. T. N. N., Granjeiro, J. M., & Calasans‐Maia, M. D. (2017). Randomized clinical trial for the biological evaluation of two nanostructured biphasic calcium phosphate biomaterials as a bone substitute. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 19(5), 802-811.
Bone substitutes represent as an a large group of biomaterials, designed especially to support the regeneration of bone defects or fractures in veterinary medical applications. Group of materials obtained with fully controlled chemical synthesis, so-called alloplast, are most frequently based on hydroxyapatite (HAp) and tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) and are proven to be significant options as relevant tissue support during regeneration1.

Biomimetic material Ossylbone™ is an alloplast, synthesized in the laboratory under fully controlled conditions, to obtain a material that will maximally resemble the properties of the natural animal bone. 

This allows us to obtain Ossylbone™ bone substitute as a fully biocompatible, bioresorbable and osteoconductive material. Additionally, due to the way of synthesis, the Ossylbone™ material can be obtain in large quantities as well as in many different shapes and forms, providing ideal solution to majority of encountered clinical case2.

Biomimetic Ossylbone™ material is structurally highly similar to the natural animal bone tissue at the physical level. This is because Ossylbone™ is characterized by porosity at range of 50 to 90% with micro and micropores staying within a range of <20µm - 500µm resembling the animal bone structure and providing proper osteoconductivity3. The chemical composition of the Ossylbone™ material is based on two compounds: hydroxyapatite (HAp) and tricalcium phosphate (β TCP)- two of the main components of bone tissue. Because of this Ossylbone™, also from a chemical point of view resembles animal bone. Additionally the presence of naturally resorbable β TCP provides an additional source of osteoconductivity and source of calcium ions necessary for bone regeneration4. Among broad range of available Ossylbone™ options, there are forms of product that contain an additional compound- chitosan. Chitosan improves biomaterial to bone adhesion and has bacteriostatic, and anti-inflammatory properties5,6.

All of those properties introduce biomimetic Ossylbone™ material as a bone substitute with high biotolerance, biocompatibility, bioactivity, and osteoconductivity, which forms a strong and permanent connection with surrounding bone tissue7.

Use of biomimetic Ossylbone™ bone substitute material has its rationale in vide range of different clinical situations where fast and reliable bone regeneration is required. This will include filling of different bone fractures, filling the space after the removal of the bone pathologies or bone cyst; filling the loss of bone after teeth removal of dental procedures where bone augmentation is needed8. 

The product is meant to be used by medical practitioners only.
  1. Ghanaati, S., Barbeck, M., Detsch, R., Deisinger, U., Hilbig, U., Rausch, V., ... & Kirkpatrick, C. J. (2012). The chemical composition of synthetic bone substitutes influences tissue reactions in vivo: histological and histomorphometrical analysis of the cellular inflammatory response to hydroxyapatite, beta-tricalcium phosphate and biphasic calcium phosphate ceramics. Biomedical materials, 7(1), 015005.
  2. Ghanaati, S., Barbeck, M., Detsch, R., Deisinger, U., Hilbig, U., Rausch, V., ... & Kirkpatrick, C. J. (2012). The chemical composition of synthetic bone substitutes influences tissue reactions in vivo: histological and histomorphometrical analysis of the cellular inflammatory response to hydroxyapatite, beta-tricalcium phosphate and biphasic calcium phosphate ceramics. Biomedical materials, 7(1), 015005.
  3. Eppley, B. L., Pietrzak, W. S., & Blanton, M. W. (2005). Allograft and alloplastic bone substitutes: a review of science and technology for the craniomaxillofacial surgeon. Journal of craniofacial surgery, 16(6), 981-989.
  4. Mour, M., Das, D., Winkler, T., Hoenig, E., Mielke, G., Morlock, M. M., & Schilling, A. F. (2010). Advances in porous biomaterials for dental and orthopaedic applications. Materials, 3(5), 2947-2974.
  5. Ielo, I., Calabrese, G., De Luca, G., & Conoci, S. (2022). Recent advances in hydroxyapatite-based biocomposites for bone tissue regeneration in orthopedics. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23(17), 9721.
  6. Goy, R. C., Britto, D. D., & Assis, O. B. (2009). A review of the antimicrobial activity of chitosan. Polímeros, 19, 241-247.
  7. Pogorielov, M. V., & Sikora, V. Z. (2015). Chitosan as a hemostatic agent: current state. European Journal of Medicine. Series B, (1), 24-33.
  8. Rojbani, H., Nyan, M., Ohya, K., & Kasugai, S. (2011). Evaluation of the osteoconductivity of α‐tricalcium phosphate, β‐tricalcium phosphate, and hydroxyapatite combined with or without simvastatin in rat calvarial defect. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 98(4), 488-498.
  9. Data on file Biovico.
The rationale for alloplast bone substitute material implementation in case of bone defects
Bone loss regeneration can be achieved with many different approach. There are number of clinical solutions proving better or not so satisfying results. Undoubtedly, use of an appropriate bone substitute is today the most popular approach with solid foundation based on many clinical eveidence1. Considering the ideal graft for bone replacement, the autografts are considered as a golden standard option, both from a biological point of view, as well as from physical and chemical point of leading to the most predictable clinical outcome2. 
However, the use of this graft type of the is strictly connected with second operation site, leading to an increase of infection risk, creation the defect and thus mechanical disturbance at the harvest site. Due to this, autografts have limited availability and use of them is related with relatively high-cost what together strictly limits their use. For the alternative treatment, the use of bone allograft (isolated from donor of the same species) or xenograft (isolated from different animals are considered as suitable alternative to autograft3. Yet, the use of those grafts is related with the increased risk of immune conflicts or transmission of the animal-derived diseases to the patient as well as with the high price4.

To overcome all the undesirable risks related with mentioned bone graft options, the use of alloplastic material has become more popular for the past recent years. This bone-like material is synthesized in fully controlled conditions in order to achieve a material that resemble the natural bone from physical and chemical perspective4. Thus, alloplastic bone graft is an inorganic, biocompatible, biotolerant, bioactive, and osteoconductive bone graft substitute5. Additionally, alloplastic bone grafts are biologically stable (they resorb slowly with no negative impact of bone cells) with volume maintenance, allowing cell infiltration and remodeling6. Additionally, alloplastic bone graft material due to its origin is known as a fully biosafe with no possibility to transmit any diseases or pathogens to the patient.
Data show that the composition of the alloplastic bone substitute material which brings the most beneficial outcomes for bone regeneration is based on hydroxyapatite (HAp) and β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP), which will mimic the inorganic part of the natural bone. Biomimetic bone substitute materials with such compositions are biocompatible and exhibit characteristics that enable new bone formation along their surfaces and within their pores7. The two-phase composition ensures biostability by estimating the balance between the rate of material resorption and long-term mechanical support of the regeneration site8. Some additional substances combined within the structure can provide supplementary features. The occurrence of chitosan in product composition improves the adhesion of bone substitute material to bone tissue, besides that it has bacteriostatic and anti-inflammatory properties9,10. Eventually, the proper structure of the alloplastic material and the appropriate size of the pores guarantee the osteoconductivity of the material and allow the bone tissue to overgrow the implant.

Taking into consideration that alloplastic bone substitute material is created to mimic as much as possible the natural structure of the bone tissue, with established properties that ensure the safety of this product and induce osteoconductivity, this material is characterized as a significant solution for bone regeneration.
  1. Lee MJ, Kim BO, Yu SJ. Clinical evaluation of a biphasic calcium phosphate grafting material in the treatment of human periodontal intrabony defects. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2012;42(4):127. doi:10.5051/jpis.2012.42.4.127
  2. Dahlin C, Johansson A. Iliac Crest Autogenous Bone Graft versus Alloplastic Graft and Guided Bone Regeneration in the Reconstruction of Atrophic Maxillae: A 5-Year Retrospective Study on Cost-Effectiveness and Clinical Outcome: Reconstruction of Atrophic Maxillae. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 2011;13(4):305-310. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00221.x
  3. Camargo PM, Lekovic V, Weinlaender M, et al. A controlled re-entry study on the effectiveness of bovine porous bone mineral used in combination with a collagen membrane of porcine origin in the treatment of intrabony defects in humans: Bovine bone mineral and porcine collagen membrane in intrabony defects. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. Eppley BL, Pietrzak WS, Blanton MW. Allograft and Alloplastic Bone Substitutes: A Review of Science and Technology For the Craniomaxillofacial Surgeon. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2005;16(6):981-989. doi:10.1097/01.scs.0000179662.38172.dd
  4. Fukuba S, Okada M, Nohara K, Iwata T. Alloplastic Bone Substitutes for Periodontal and Bone Regeneration in Dentistry: Current Status and Prospects. Materials. 2021;14(5):1096. doi:10.3390/ma14051096
  5. Hsu Y, Wang H. How to Select Replacement Grafts for Various Periodontal and Implant Indications. Clin Adv Periodontics. 2013;3(3):167-179. doi:10.1902/cap.2012.120031
  6. Rojbani H, Nyan M, Ohya K, Kasugai S. Evaluation of the osteoconductivity of α-tricalcium phosphate, β-tricalcium phosphate, and hydroxyapatite combined with or without simvastatin in rat calvarial defect. J Biomed Mater Res. 2011;98A(4):488-498. doi:10.1002/jbm.a.33117
  7. Ghanaati S, Barbeck M, Detsch R, et al. The chemical composition of synthetic bone substitutes influences tissue reactions in vivo : histological and histomorphometrical analysis of the cellular inflammatory response to hydroxyapatite, beta-tricalcium phosphate and biphasic calcium phosphate ceramics. Biomed Mater. 2012;7(1):015005. doi:10.1088/1748-6041/7/1/015005
  8. Goy RC, Britto DD, Assis OBG. A review of the antimicrobial activity of chitosan. Polímeros. 2009;19(3):241-247. doi:10.1590/S0104-14282009000300013
  9. Sumy State University, Ukraine, Pogorielov MV, Sikora VZ. Chitosan as a Hemostatic Agent: Current State. European Journal of Medicine Series B. 2015;2(1):24-33. doi:10.13187/ejm.s.b.2015.2.24