Comparative Angiogenic Potential of Collagen and Polytetrafluoroethylene Guided Tissue Regeneration Membranes: An Experimental Chick Embryo Chorioallantoic Membrane Assay Study.

Authors

Roopal Gupta, Vidya Dodwad, Pooja Pharne, Nishita Bhosale, Devashri Newaskar, Sanpreet S Sachdev

Published in

Cureus. Volume 18. Issue 6. Pages e111143. Epub Jun 19, 2026.

Abstract

Background Angiogenesis is an important biological event in periodontal regeneration, as early vascular support is necessary for oxygen delivery, nutrient transport, and tissue healing. Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) membranes may influence this vascular response depending on their material properties. Aim To compare the angiogenic response of resorbable collagen and non-resorbable polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) GTR membranes using the chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay. Materials and methods Thirty fertilized chicken eggs were divided equally into three groups: control, collagen membrane, and PTFE membrane. On Day 3 of incubation, the respective membranes were placed onto the CAM surface, while no membrane was placed in the control group. On Day 7, macroscopic images were obtained and analyzed using Wimasis Image Analysis software (Wimasis, Onimagin Technologies SCA, Córdoba, Spain). Vessel density, total vessel network length, and branching points were compared using Welch analysis of variance and Games-Howell post hoc test. Results PTFE showed significantly higher vessel density, total vessel network length, and branching points than both the control and collagen groups (p < 0.001). The collagen group showed significantly higher branching points than the control group, but vessel density and total vessel network length were not significantly different between these two groups. Conclusion PTFE demonstrated a stronger angiogenic response than collagen in the CAM model. These findings suggest material-dependent differences in early vascular response, but further histological, animal, and clinical studies are required before clinical conclusions can be made.

PMID:
42473499
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 20 Jul 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.