Propolis–xenograft scaffolds: comparing delivery methods for tibial bone regeneration in rats

Authors

  • Yunia Dwi Rakhmatia Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
  • Lisda Damayanti Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
  • Rasmi Rikmasari Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
  • Nuroh Najmi Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
  • Sri Tjahajawati Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
  • Eriska Riyanti Department of Pediatrics Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2340/biid.v13.46215

Keywords:

Propolis extract, xenograft, bone regeneration

Abstract

Background: Alveolar bone loss after tooth extraction may compromise implant placement and often requires regenerative treatment. Propolis, a natural compound with osteogenic and anti-inflammatory properties, may enhance bone regeneration, particularly when combined with xenograft biomaterials. This study evaluated the effects of oral and topical propolis, alone and in combination with xenograft, on bone healing in a rat tibial defect model.

Materials and methods: Sixty male Wistar rats were randomly assigned to six groups (n = 10): control, oral propolis, topical propolis, xenograft, oral propolis with xenograft, and topical propolis with xenograft. Standardized tibial defects (5 × 2 × 2 mm) were created and treated accordingly. After 4 weeks, radiographic, histological, and histomorphometric analyses were performed. Outcomes included relative bone density, new bone area, and osteoblast and osteoclast counts. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey post hoc test (p < 0.05).

Results: Relative bone density increased from 19% in the control group to 81% in the topical propolis with xenograft group (p < 0.05). This group also showed the largest new bone area (434,196 ± 153,911 µm² vs. 89,408 ± 42,376 µm²; p < 0.001), higher osteoblast counts (178.4 ± 44.2 vs. 49.4 ± 15.2), and lower osteoclast counts compared with single-treatment groups (p < 0.001). Combination treatments, particularly topical propolis with xenograft, consistently yielded superior outcomes (p < 0.01).

Conclusion: Propolis enhances bone regeneration, especially when applied topically in combination with xenograft. This approach promotes bone formation and balanced remodeling, supporting its potential for clinical application in bone regenerative therapy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Lin R, Dai A, Huang JP, Wang M, He W, Ding P. Effect of initial bone morphology on alveolar bone remodeling following molar extraction: a retrospective study. J Periodontol. 2025;6(10):1063–76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.24-0342

Raj R, Bhardwaj A, Lall AB, Chandra L, Agarwal S. Preserving the ridge: unpacking the concept and controversies in alveolar ridge preservation. Santosh Univ J Health Sci. 2025;11(2):355–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/sujhs.sujhs_119_25

Khaddour AS, Ghiță RE, Ionescu M, Rîcă RG, Mercuț V, Manolea HO, et al. Healing of extraction sites after alveolar ridge preservation using advanced platelet-rich fibrin: a retrospective study. Bioengineering (Basel). 2024;11(6):566. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11060566

Yu H, Cai Q, Li B, Meng W. The assessment of volumetric changes for alveolar ridge preservation or reconstruction by 3D analysis at posterior extraction sites with severe bone defects using DBBM-C collagen membrane and PRF: a prospective and randomized clinical trial. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2024;44(6):673–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.6971

von Wilmowsky C, Moest T, Nkenke E, Stelzle F, Schlegel KA. Implants in bone: part I. A current overview about tissue response, surface modifications and future perspectives. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;18(3):243–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-013-0398-1

De Camargo KS. Major approaches to dental implants in the biological environment of bone regeneration: a systematic review. MedNEXT J Med Health Sci. 2023;5(1):1–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54448/mdnt24101

Sukhonos O, Korenkov O, Sukhodub L. A modern view on reparative osteogenesis: main stages and their patterns. East Ukr Med J. 2024;12(3):476–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21272/eumj.2024;12(3):476-491

Bixel M, Sivaraj KK, Timmen M, Mohanakrishnan V, Aravamudhan A, Adams S, et al. Angiogenesis is uncoupled from osteogenesis during calvarial bone regeneration. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):4575. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-48579-5

Sah N, Sarode PP, Warang A, Tarase T, Gavhale P, Mirgane MR. Alveolar ridge preservation using xenograft following tooth extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cureus. 2025;17(4):e81815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.81815

Elbanna R, Abdelaziz M, Alameldeen HE. Augmentation of single tooth extraction socket with deficient buccal walls using bovine xenograft with platelet-rich fibrin membrane. BMC Oral Health. 2023;23(1):874. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03554-2

Bello SA, Cruz-Lebron J, Rodríguez-Rivera OA, Nicolau E. Bioactive scaffolds as a promising alternative for enhancing critical-size bone defect regeneration in the craniomaxillofacial region. ACS Appl Bio Mater. 2023;6(11):4465–503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.3c00432

Oryan A, Alidadi S, Moshiri A, Maffulli N. Bone regenerative medicine: classic options, novel strategies, and future directions J Orthop Surg Res. 2014;9(1):18.

Janmohammadi M, Nazemi Z, Salehi AOM, Seyfoori A, John JV, Nourbakhsh MS, et al. Cellulose-based composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering and localized drug delivery. Bioact Mater. 2023;20:137–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.05.018

Bertolucci V, Ninomiya AF, Longato GB, Kaneko LO, Nonose N, Scariot PPM, et al. Bioactive compounds from propolis on bone homeostasis: a narrative review. Antioxidants (Basel). 2025;14(1):81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox14010081

Ekeuku SO, Chin K. Application of propolis in protecting skeletal and periodontal health – a systematic review. Molecules. 2021;26(11):3156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26113156

Ramesh P, Jagadeesan R, Sekaran S, Dhanasekaran A, Vimalraj S. Flavonoids: classification, function, and molecular mechanisms involved in bone remodelling. Front Endocrinol. 2021;12:779638. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2021.779638

Zheng Y, Zhang Z, Fu Z, Fan A, Song N, Wang Q, et al. Oral propolis nanoemulsions modulate gut microbiota to balance bone remodeling for enhanced osteoporosis therapy. ACS Nano. 2024;18(38):26153–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.4c07332

Meimandi-Parizi A, Oryan A, Sayahi E, Bigham-Sadegh A. Propolis extract a new reinforcement material in improving bone healing: an in vivo study. Int J Surg. 2018;56:94–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.06.006

Zohery AA, Meshri SM, Madi MI, Abd El Rehim SS, Nour ZM. Egyptian propolis compared to nanohydroxyapatite graft in the treatment of class II furcation defects in dogs. J Periodontol. 2018;89(11):1340–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.17-0685

Zulhendri F, Lesmana R, Tandean S, Christoper A, Chandrasekaran K, Irsyam I, et al. Recent update on the anti-inflammatory activities of propolis. Molecules. 2022;27(23):8473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27238473

Pratami DK, Sahlan M, Bayu A, Putra MY, Ibrahim B, Siswadi, et al. Characteristics of Indonesian stingless bee propolis and study of metabolomic properties based on region and species. Molecules. 2024;29(17):4037. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29174037

Paget GE, Barnes JM. Chapter 6 – toxicity test. In: Laurence DR, Bacharach AL, editors. Evaluation of drug activities: pharmacometrics. London: Academic Press, 1964; p. 135–166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-4832-2845-7.50012-8

Poser L, Matthys R, Schawalder P, Pearce SG, Alini M, Zeiter S. A standardized critical size defect model in normal and osteoporotic rats to evaluate bone tissue engineered constructs. Biomed Res Int. 2014:2014:348635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/348635

Ebrakhim M, Moiseev D, Strelnikov V, Salloum A, Faustova E, Ermolaev A, et al. A new method for the digital assessment of the relative density of bone tissue in dentistry using the ImageJ software package. Dent J. 2025;13:375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13080375

Durmuş HI, Kuşan KF, Kızılseki T, Uçar K. Therapeutic and regenerative applications of propolis in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a current review. Int J Dent Oral Res. 2025;5(3):227–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61139/ijdor.1803201

Chen S, Wang M. Fabrication, properties, and applications of scaffolds for bone tissue regeneration. Adv Mater Technol. 2026;11(9):e01877. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/admt.202501877

Jung Y, Kim W, Lee SH, Ju K, Jang E, Kim S, et al. Evaluation of new octacalcium phosphate-coated xenograft in rats calvarial defect model on bone regeneration. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(19):4391. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13194391

Shete MB, Chavan K, Raysing S, Ejaz AI. Lipid nanocarriers of naringin dispersed gel for topical application: development, in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo kinetics evaluations. Biopolymers. 2025;116(4):e70039. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bip.70039

Uçan M, Koparal M, Ağaçayak S, Günay A, Ozgoz M, Atılgan S, et al. Influence of caffeic acid phenethyl ester on bone healing in a rat model. J Int Med Res. 2013;41(5):1648–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060513490613

Weber F. Reconsidering osteoconduction in the era of additive manufacturing. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2019;25(5):375–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.teb.2019.0047

Păltânea G, Paltanea VM, Antoniac I, Antoniac A, Nemoianu I, Robu A, et al. A review of biomimetic and biodegradable magnetic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering and oncology. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(5):4312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24054312

Moura SALD, Negri G, Salatino A, Lima LDDC, Dourado LPA, Mendes JB, et al. Aqueous extract of Brazilian green propolis: primary components, evaluation of inflammation and wound healing by using subcutaneous implanted sponges. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2011;2011:748283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecam/nep112

Lunardhi LC, Kresnoadi U, Agustono B. The effect of a combination of propolis extract and bovine bone graft on the quantity of fibroblasts, osteoblasts and osteoclasts in tooth extraction sockets. Dent J (Maj Ked Gigi). 2019;52(3):126–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20473/j.djmkg.v52.i3.p126-132

Wibowo I, Utami N, Anggraeni T, Barlian A, Putra RE, Indriani AD, et al. Propolis can improve caudal fin regeneration in zebrafish (Danio rerio) induced by the combined administration of alloxan and glucose. Zebrafish. 2021;18(4):274–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/zeb.2020.1969

Stähli A, Maheen CU, Strauss FJ, Eick S, Sculean A, Gruber R, et al. Caffeic acid phenethyl ester protects against oxidative stress and dampens inflammation via heme oxygenase 1. Int J Oral Sci. 2019;11(1):6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41368-018-0039-5

Abduh MY, Shafitri TR, Elfahmi E. Chemical profiling, bioactive compounds, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory activities of Indonesian propolis extract produced by Tetragonula laeviceps. Heliyon. 2024;10(19):e38736. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38736

Kitamura H. Effects of propolis extract and propolis-derived compounds on obesity and diabetes: knowledge from cellular and animal models. Molecules. 2019;24(23):4394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24234394

Kocot J, Kiełczykowska M, Luchowska-Kocot D, Kurzepa J, Musik I. Antioxidant potential of propolis, bee pollen, and royal jelly: possible medical application. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2018;2018:7074209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7074209

Wu M, Liu H, Zhu Y, Wu P, Chen Y, Deng Z, et al. Bioinspired soft-hard combined system with mild photothermal therapeutic activity promotes diabetic bone defect healing via synergetic effects of immune activation and angiogenesis. Theranostics. 2024;14(10):4014–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.97335

Vasileva R, Chaprazov T. Bone healing of critical-sized femoral defects in rats treated with erythropoietin alone or in combination with xenograft. Vet Sci. 2023;10(3):196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10030196

Kızıldağ A, Arabacı T, Albayrak M, Taşdemir U, Şenel E, Dalyanoglu M, et al. Therapeutic effects of caffeic acid phenethyl ester on alveolar bone loss in rats with endotoxin-induced periodontitis. J Dent Sci. 2019;14(4):339–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2019.03.011

Ibrahim M, Khalil N, Fahmy R. Management of Class II furcation defects in dogs using combination of propolis and nanobone graft. Egypt Dent J. 2019;74774.

Hossain R, Quispe C, Khan RA, Saikat ASM, Ray P, Ongalbek D, et al. Propolis: an update on its chemistry and pharmacological applications. Chin Med. 2022;17(1):100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13020-022-00651-2

Published

2026-07-02

How to Cite

Rakhmatia, Y. D., Damayanti, L., Rikmasari, R., Najmi, N., Tjahajawati, S., & Riyanti, E. (2026). Propolis–xenograft scaffolds: comparing delivery methods for tibial bone regeneration in rats. Biomaterial Investigations in Dentistry, 13(1), 544–553. https://doi.org/10.2340/biid.v13.46215