Real Opportunity for the Present and a Forward Step for the Future of Bone Tissue Engineering.

TLDR: The emergence of some new predictable therapeutic options, such as a viable alternative to common bone grafts, is related to avoiding harvesting bone from extra oral sites when performing maxillofacial reconstruction procedures because of the morbidity associated with the regenerative surgery.

Abstract: 592 ‘‘Function’’ and ‘‘Aes R and oral surgeons. thetics’’ are goals not always be easily reached. In the last 50 years, several reconstructive options have been published and documented in order to obtain adequate maxillary bone volume previously lost due to pathological or traumatic events. The effective treatments for managing atrophic ridge bone defects have been debated in recent literature and are often related to the nature of the atrophic ridge defects (vertical, horizontal, or both). The material used for the bone regenerative techniques may include autologous, homologous, xenogeneic, and allogeneic grafts. Even though autogenous bone is still considered the best option due to its integration histological features, the main limit of its application is connected to the pain and discomfort experienced by the patient at the grafted area. Therefore, the emergence of some new predictable therapeutic options, such as a viable alternative to common bone grafts, is related to avoiding harvesting bone from extra oral sites when performing maxillofacial reconstruction procedures because of the morbidity associated with the regenerative surgery. It must be remembered how, in the last 10 years, tissue engineering has made significant steps based on data resulting from in vitro, animal, and clinical studies. In 2007, the Federal Drug Administration finally granted approval on rhBMP-2 (Infuse Bone Graft-Medtronic, Memphis, TN) as an option to autogenous bone graft used for sinus lift surgical procedure and for atrophic bone ridge augmentations of the jaw. This statement was based on data recorded from 312 patients enrolled in a total of 5 clinical multicenter studies. This was the result of a growth factor research started a long time ago by Dr Urist and then developed by Prof PJ Boyne at the beginning of 1990s. In 2007 and 2009, Prof Maiorana, Head at Milan University, gave me the chance to spend my research training at the Loma Linda University working with Prof Boyne and Prof Herford. I was involved in an animal study about growth factors and tissue regeneration procedures. I was in my early 20s and so curious about this research: it was as attractive to me as a bear is to honey irresistible. Boyne was the ‘‘science,’’ and he reflected his passion