AUTHOR=García-González Mario , Muñoz Guzón Fernando María , González-Cantalapiedra Antonio , González-Fernández Pío Manuel , Otero Pérez Rafael , Serra Rodríguez Julia Asunción 

TITLE=Application of Shark Teeth–Derived Bioapatites as a Bone Substitute in Veterinary Orthopedics. Preliminary Clinical Trial in Dogs and Cats

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Veterinary Science

VOLUME=7

YEAR=2020

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/veterinary-science/articles/10.3389/fvets.2020.574017

DOI=10.3389/fvets.2020.574017

ISSN=2297-1769

ABSTRACT=<p><bold>Background:</bold> The autograft is still considered the gold standard for the treatment of bone defects. However, given the significant morbidity of the donor site with which it has been associated, alternative substitutes for bone grafts have been developed. In the present study, a bone substitute composed of CaP biphasic bioceramics obtained from shark teeth was used (BIOFAST-VET).</p><p><bold>Objective:</bold> The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of a marine bioapatite in the veterinary clinical field using it as a bone-grafting scaffold in dogs and cats.</p><p><bold>Methods:</bold> The biomaterial was randomly distributed in 6 veterinary clinical centers in Spain and was used in 24 cases (20 dogs and 4 cats) including 14 fractures, 9 arthrodesis, and 1 bone cyst. Grains between 500 and 2,000 μm were used. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established. The time of consolidation and functional recovery were quantitatively and qualitatively assessed. For this, a follow-up was carried out at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks, included radiographic images, physical examination and sharing the feedback with the owners.</p><p><bold>Results:</bold> Nineteen cases completed the study (18 dogs and 1 cat; 11 fractures, 7 arthrodesis, and 1 bone cyst). The remaining five were excluded because they did not complete the radiographic follow-up (three cats and two dogs), being three arthrodesis and two fractures. In 18 of 19 cases, the use of the biomaterial was successful; the remaining one failed due to causes not related to the biomaterial. There were no systemic or local adverse reactions. Eighteen patients had a good functional recovery. The average consolidation time was 5.94 weeks in dogs with fractures and arthrodesis, not finding statistically significant differences between sex, weight, and procedure.</p><p><bold>Conclusions:</bold> This biomaterial is presented as a very suitable candidate for orthopedic surgery in the veterinary field. Preliminary results showed that its use reduces consolidation time in dogs with fractures and arthrodesis. In addition, no adverse systemic or local reactions have been observed derived from its use.</p>