Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 66, Issue 11 , Pages 2233-2238, November 2008

Effects of Simvastatin on Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis

  • Erdem Kılıç, DDS, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental School, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey
  • ,
  • İlker Özeç, DDS, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental School, Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Turkey
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Özeç: Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi, Dişhekimliği Fakültesi, ADÇH ve Cerrahisi AD, 58140, Sivas, Turkey
  • ,
  • Hasan Yeler, DDS, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental School, Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Turkey
  • ,
  • Adnan Korkmaz, MD

      Affiliations

    • Professor, Department of Histology and Embryology, Medical School, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey
  • ,
  • Bülent Ayas, MD

      Affiliations

    • Assistant Professor, Department of Histology and Embryology, Medical School, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey
  • ,
  • Cesur Gümüş, MD

      Affiliations

    • Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, Medical School, Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Turkey

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of local and systemic simvastatin application on distraction osteogenesis.

Materials and Methods

Eighteen New Zealand white rabbits underwent unilateral mandibular distraction osteogenesis. After 7 days of neutral fixation, 0.4 mm twice per day, distraction was performed for 10 days. Simvastatin was applied locally during the osteotomy phase with a gelatin sponge carrier and systemically during the distraction osteogenesis period by oral gavage. All animals were killed at the end of the consolidation period of 14 days. The distracted mandibles were harvested and evaluated by plain radiography, by peripheral quantitative computed tomography, and with histomorphometry.

Results

Radiographic evaluation with peripheral quantitative computed tomography showed that the area of the regenerate increased by 9.6% in the local simvastatin group and by 19.3% in the systemic simvastatin group as compared with the control group. In both experimental groups the density of the regenerate increased by 6.7% as compared with the control group. Statistical evaluation of radiographic data showed that all of these changes were not significant. Histomorphometric evaluation determined that there was no statistical difference among groups with regard to the ratios of bone tissue volume to fibrous tissue volume and bone tissue volume to marrow tissue volume.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that simvastatin's effect on enhancing distraction regenerate is limited with the applied doses and methods.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0278-2391(08)00937-3

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2008.05.362

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 66, Issue 11 , Pages 2233-2238, November 2008