ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite: A New Era in
Bone Regeneration
Vivekanand Kattimani, MDS, Krishna Prasad Lingamaneni, MDS,
Pandi Srinivas Chakravarthi, MDS, T.S. Sampath Kumar, PhD,y and Arjunan Siddharthan, PhDz
Background: Defects of maxillofacial skeleton lead to personal
(functional and aesthetic), social and behavioral problems; which
make the person to isolate from the main stream of society. So, bone
regeneration is the need for proper structure, function, and aes-
thetics following cyst enucleation, trauma, and tumor ablative
surgery; which helps for overall health of the individual.
Aim and Objectives: The preliminary study is planned to evaluate
and compare the efficacy of eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite
(EHA) and synthetic hydroxyapatite (SHA) following cystectomy.
Material and Methods: Microwave-processed calcium deficient
EHA and commercially available SHA are used for grafting. Total
20 patients enrolled in this study, consisting 10 in each group
between 20 and 45 years of age. All the patients were evaluated for
bone regeneration at first, second, third, and sixth month’s interval,
postsurgically, using radiovisiograph and clinical parameters.
Results: The bone formation characteristics vary at second month
when compared to SHA. This difference may be because of the
kinetics involved in the regeneration pattern. The pattern of bone
healing was trabecular after third month, indicating complete bone
formation. The study showed constant raise of density and remained
same at the end of study period.
Conclusions: Both EHA and SHA graft materials are equally
efficient in early bone regeneration. Within the limitations of
this study the EHA showed promising results. Which indicates
the eggshell waste-bio mineral is worthwhile raw material for the
production of HA and is a Go Green procedure. Eggshell-derived
hydroxyapatite is economic, compared with SHA.
Key Words: Apicoectomy, bone substitute, cystectomy, hen’s
eggshell, graft, osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity, synthetic
hydroxyapatite
(J Craniofac Surg 2016;27: 112–117)
T o promote healing of large bone defects using graft material is
well known.1– 3 Missing bone is replaced traditionally with
From the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sibar Institute of
Dental Sciences, Guntur; yMedical Materials Laboratory, Department of
Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology
Madras; and zDepartment of Production Technology, MIT Campus,
Anna University, Chennai, India.
Received May 26, 2015.
Accepted for publication September 27, 2015.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Vivekanand Kattimani,
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sibar Institute of Dental
Sciences, Guntur 522509, Andhra Pradesh, India;
E-mail: drvivekanandsk@gmail.com
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Copyright # 2015 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD
ISSN: 1049-2275
DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000002288
112 The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery
Copyright © 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
material either from patient or donor.1–3 Clinicians and scientists
are in search of alternative bone graft substitutes because of factors
like donor site morbidity, time, and skill required for second surgery
to harvest graft, inadequate quantity available with respect to auto
grafts, and so.4–9 Multiple sources and different forms of bone grafts
have been used for bone augmentation and reconstruction in oral
maxillofacial and orthopedic surgery to stimulate bone healing since
long time.3,7–10 In recent years, use of synthetic or processed bone
graft substitute has gained popularity over traditional grafting
methods.3,7–9
Hydroxyapatite (HA) is apatite calcium phosphate
Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2. In many disciplines of surgery HA is being used
as graft material successfully.11 In particular, HA shows highest
level of bioactivity and forms a quick bond with bone.10– 12 A recent
study showed bioactive effect of the HA ceramic is because of the
ability to concentrate active fibronectin on its surface.13 Hydro-
xyapatite is available in porous/dense block or granular form for
clinical use.2,3,7– 9 It is an inorganic ceramic substance which does
not cause any foreign body reaction; in porous grafts the hard tissue
grows into it and mingles with natural tissues.11–15
The eggshell formulations are being used since beginning as
trace element and mineral supplying agents.16,17 The eggshell
powder has been examined in rats for bone healing.16– 20 Few
studies show surface modified eggshell powder as osteoconductive
bone filling material with variable benefit in bone regener-
ation.16,17,21 The literature showed material properties of egg-
shell-derived hydroxyapatite (EHA) are superior when compared
with the commercially available graft materials.22,23 So, the EHA
has been introduced as bone graft substitute recently.23 Histomor-
phometric evaluation showed that the EHA has excellent new bone
formation ability.18–21 This has led to the curiosity to prepare the
EHA from eggshell waste in a very economical way.22– 24
The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the efficacy of
indigenously prepared EHA with commercially available synthetic
hydroxyapatite (SHA) for enhancement of the bone regeneration. In
addition, the effect of grafting was evaluated using direct digital
radiographic imaging technique and computer densitometry in bone
regeneration of human cystic bone defects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Synthetic Hydroxyapatite
The SHA was obtained from synthetic calcium HA in low-
crystalline form. It is a mixture of HA, tri-calcium phosphate,
calcium phosphate, and calcium carbonate. Polycrystalline struc-
ture of HA is responsible for its strength. In our study, SHA used is
acquired from market; commercially available as G-synthetic gran-
ules (G Surgiwear, Shahjahanpur, India).
Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite
Eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite sample preparation and
characterization22,23 is well described in our previous study. Many
preparatory methods were proposed for preparation of nano-HA in
 Volume 27, Number 1, January 2016
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery  Volume 27, Number 1, January 2016 Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite

TABLE 1. Showing Distribution of Subjects According to Groups and Sex TABLE 3. Showing the Size of the Lesion Preoperatively in Both the Groups

Sex SHA Group % EHA Group % Total % Size of the Lesion SHA EHA
Preoperatively Group % Group % Total %
Male 5 50.00 5 50.00 10 50.00
Female 5 50.00 5 50.00 10 50.00 <2 cm 5 50.00 2 20.00 7 35.00
Total 10 100.00 10 100.00 20 100.00 >2 cm 5 50.00 8 80.00 13 65.00
Total 10 100.00 10 100.00 20 100.00
EHA, eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite; SHA, synthetic hydroxyapatite.
EHA, eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite SHA, synthetic hydroxyapatite.

25–35
the literature, but in this study EHA is indigenously synthes-
ized by microwave processing. The EHA produced was chemically RESULTS
pure form of nanocrystalline calcium deficient hydroxyapatite with
eggshell origin alike any other SHA.22– 24
Clinical Observations
The sizes of cysts were ranged from 2 to 4 cm in diameter. All
Clinical and Radiologic Evaluation the patients were healed well without significant adverse clinical
The study was conducted in the Department of Oral and Max- observations irrespective of the size of the lesion in both the groups
illofacial Surgery in our institute after ethical committee approval. (Table 3). First day postsurgical clinical examination showed
The study registered in Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI) similar edema among patients in both the groups with reddish
retrospectively with CTRI numbers CTRI/2014/09/004947 and overlying mucosa in all the patients. At the time of suture removal,
CTRI/2014/12/005340. A total number of 20 patients aged between the mucosal color and contour was normal in all the patients.
20 and 45 years with periapical cyst/residual cyst of anterior Moreover, no flap dehiscence was observed.
maxilla, requiring cystectomy/apicoectomy, and grafting were
enrolled (Tables 1-2). All the patients were divided randomly into Digital Radiographic Observations
2 groups with 10 patients in each group. In Group-1 the cystic
Radiologic evaluation of surgical site outline and bone formation
defects were filled with SHA, whereas in Group-2 with EHA.
characteristics in both the groups were significant with time interval
All the patients were followed up during first and second week
(Table 4; Fig. 1), but on comparison between the groups both SHA
postsurgically to evaluate the signs and symptoms of infection or any
and EHA showed similar pattern of bone formation and bone healing
other complications related with the surgical procedure. During
characteristics along with the margin blend with material margin at
clinical evaluation mucosal color, postoperative pain or swelling
first, third, and second month’s interval (Table 5). The mean radio-
was noted. Pain measurements were carried out using visual analog
graphic density of grafted cystic bone defects were continued to
scale. The wound healed uneventfully in all the patients. Seventh day
increase until it reached its maximum at 24 weeks (Table 6). The
of postsurgery, suture removal was done. Infected patients were
mean density of SHA and EHA group were similar at third and sixth
excluded from the study. Bone regeneration was assessed postopera-
month’s interval. The formation of bone and bone margin blending
tively at first, second, third, and sixth month’s intervals using
with material margin were well correlated with density of bone
modified observer strategy.36,37 The radiographs were examined
formation. The radiographs shows well demarcation of both material
blindly by 2 examiners. In case of any gross inconsistency with
and bone margin during first month follow-up (Fig. 2 A-B), and was
observations, the third examiner observed the radiographs to prevent
invisible with passage of time (Figs. 3-5). At sixth month’s interval on
bias and the results were tabulated. Surrounding normal bone density
both the sides it showed trabecular appearance indicating complete
was also measured as a control since beginning and correlated till last
bone formation (Fig. 6). The observations of bone regeneration
follow-up for comparison using the variable intensity light.
parameters by both the examiners were in very good agreement with
each other (k: 0.81–0.92).
Statistical Analysis
Radiographic changes in surgical site outline, internal portion of
surgical site after surgery were statistically compared using Mann- TABLE 4. Showing the Comparison of Groups (Synthetic Hydroxyapatite,
Whitney test and Wilcoxon matched-pairs test. The kappa (k) Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite) With Radiologic Evaluation of Surgical Site
correlation was taken into consideration to assess the degree of Outline at First, Second, Third, and Sixth Month by Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Test
observer agreement for radiologic assessment. The mean values and Groups Treatments N t z P
standard deviations of each parameter were calculated. The Student
t-test used to evaluate the differences between the means; P < 0.05 SHA First month versus second month 10 0.00 2.8031 0.0051
was considered as significant. First month versus third month 10 0.00 2.0226 0.0431
First month versus sixth month 10 0.00 — —
TABLE 2. Showing Mean and Standard Deviation Age of Men and Women by Second month versus third month 10 15.00 1.2741 0.2026
Groups and Sex Second month versus sixth month 10 3.00 2.4973 0.0125
SHA Group EHA Group Total Third month versus sixth month 10 0.00 1.8257 0.0679
EHA First month versus second month 10 0.00 2.8031 0.0051
Sex Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD First month versus third month 10 0.00 2.0226 0.0431
First month versus sixth month 10 0.00 — —
Male 28.20 7.66 25.00 4.53 26.60 6.17 Second month versus third month 10 15.00 1.2741 0.2026
Female 34.40 4.98 29.60 14.06 32.00 10.26 Second month versus sixth month 10 3.00 2.4973 0.0125
Total 31.30 6.91 27.30 10.14 29.30 8.69 Third month versus sixth month 10 0.00 1.8257 0.0679

EHA, eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite; SD, standard deviation; SHA, synthetic EHA, eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite; SHA, synthetic hydroxyapatite.
hydroxyapatite. 
Significant at (P < 0.05).

# 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD 113

Copyright © 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Kattimani et al The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery  Volume 27, Number 1, January 2016

TABLE 6. Showing the Comparison of Radiologic Evaluation of Bone Density

(SHA, EHA) at First, Second, Third, and Sixth Month’s Interval

Treatment Time Group N Mean SD T P

First month SHA 10 102.10 8.65 1.8365 0.0829

EHA 10 108.00 5.33
Second month SHA 10 121.30 9.79 2.1745 0.0433
EHA 10 129.30 6.29
Third month SHA 10 145.10 9.39 0.4636 0.6485
EHA 10 147.30 11.71
Sixth month SHA 10 165.70 8.58 0.6441 0.5277
EHA 10 160.90 21.95
First–second month SHA 10 19.20 5.79 0.6679 0.5127
EHA 10 21.30 8.08
First month–third month SHA 10 43.00 6.22 0.7549 0.4601
EHA 10 39.30 14.20
FIGURE 1. Graph shows the comparison of eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite First month–sixth month SHA 10 63.60 10.01 1.3079 0.2074
and synthetic hydroxyapatite groups with radiologic evaluation of bone EHA 10 52.90 23.85
formation at first week, first, third and sixth month interval.
EHA, eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite; SHA, synthetic hydroxyapatite; SD, stan-
DISCUSSION dard deviation.

The limitations4– 6 of autografts and allografts have necessitated the Significant at (P < 0.05).
pursuit of alternatives.2,3,7 –9 Osteoconduction and osteoinduction
are the 2 basic properties of the grafts used by investigators to nanocrystalline HA is osteoinductive in nature,10,38 and stimulates
develop several alternatives. Such materials are available for cells for periodontal tissue regeneration.12 The rapid bone regen-
clinical use and some of which are still in the developmental eration associated with graft is because of enhancement of selective
stage.2,3,7– 9 These alternative materials include natural/synthetic adsorption of attachment proteins and growth factors by HA, which
polymers, ceramics, and composites; whereas remaining are incorp- stimulates osteoblast adhesion and bone deposition12,13 or through
orated with different factors and cell-based strategies used either ion release.39 This versatile biomaterial derived from many sources
alone or in combination.2– 3,7– 9 eg, bone, corals, synthetic etc.3 Hydroxyapatite is unique biocom-
Hydroxyapatite is a naturally occurring mineral component of patible versatile biomaterial can be machined to many shapes or
bone and is osteoconductive in nature, which is used to graft bone consistencies.39–41 The porous form of HA stabilizes because of
defects to stimulate bone healing.2,3,7 –9 Recent literature showed rapid fibrovascular tissue ingrowths, and resist micromotion.42

TABLE 5. Comparison of 2 Groups (Synthetic Hydroxyapatite, Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite) With Radiologic Evaluation Surgical Site Outline, Bone Formation
and Bone Healing Patterns at First, Second, Third, and Sixth Month by Mann-Whitney Test

Treatment Time Groups Sum of Ranks U z P

Radiologic evaluation surgical site outline First month SHA 105.00

EHA 105.00 50.00 0.0000 1.0000
Second month SHA 105.00
EHA 105.00 50.00 0.0000 1.0000
Third month SHA 105.00
EHA 105.00 50.00 0.0000 1.0000
Sixth month SHA 105.00
EHA 105.00 50.00 0.0000 1.0000
Radiologic evaluation of bone Formation First month SHA 105.00
EHA 105.00 50.00 0.0000 1.0000
Second month SHA 85.00
EHA 125.00 30.00 1.5119 0.1306
Third month SHA 110.00
EHA 100.00 45.00 0.3780 0.7055
Sixth month SHA 110.00
EHA 100.00 45.00 0.3780 0.7055
Radiologic evaluation of bone Healing First month SHA 105.00
EHA 105.00 50.00 0.0000 1.0000
Second month SHA 85.00
EHA 125.00 30.00 1.5119 0.1306
Third month SHA 110.00
EHA 100.00 45.00 0.3780 0.7055
Sixth month SHA 110.00
EHA 100.00 45.00 0.3780 0.7055

EHA, eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite; SHA, synthetic hydroxyapatite.

114 # 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD

Copyright © 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery  Volume 27, Number 1, January 2016
FIGURE 2. A, Immediate radiograph after synthetic hydroxyapatite grafting on
the right side showing the well demarcation of margins at periapical area of right
central incisor and right lateral incisor. B, Immediate radiograph after eggshell-
derived hydroxyapatite grafting on the left side showing the well demarcation
of margins at periapical area of left central incisor and left lateral incisor.
Hydroxyapatite is used for sinus grafting, socket preservation,
grafting of bony defects, ridge augmentations, and as a bone graft
expander when combined with autogenous bone and so.43– 44 This
mixing could decrease the volume of autogenous bone graft needed,
which in turn potentially reduces the donor site morbidity.44–46 This
study compared the EHA versus SHA as a novel bone graft material.
In our study, nanocrystalline calcium deficient EHA was used
which is very similar to natural bone apatite. The main inorganic
component of bone is calcium–hydroxyapatite, which contains
carbonated (3–8 w/t %), calcium deficient biologic HA and is
nonstoichiometric, noncrystalline, and ionsubstituted.47 Synthetic
hydroxyapatite is often stoichiometric with a specific atomic Ca/P
molar ratio of 1.67 and chemical formula of Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2.22,23
Synthetic hydroxyapatite is similar in chemical and crystallo-
graphic structure with that of bone material with excellent
FIGURE 3. Radiograph after one month of the grafting showing improved bone
formation at periapical area of right central incisor, right lateral incisor, left
central incisor, and left lateral incisor.
# 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD
Copyright © 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite
FIGURE 4. Radiograph after two month of the grafting showing improved bone
formation at periapical area of right central incisor, right lateral incisor, left
central incisor, and left lateral incisor.
biocompatibility.47–50 One of the main components of HA and
all living hard tissues is calcium. So the source of calcium needed
for the preparation of HA can be obtained from natural precursors
like eggshells, which minimizes impurities like silica in the
material; also the cost of production can be reduced a lot as there
is no need to purify.22,24 Eggshells are one of the richest sources of
calcium, consisting of calcium carbonate (94%), calcium phosphate
(1%), organic matter (4%), and magnesium carbonate (1%).22,24 A
huge amount of eggshells are produced daily which are basically of
no use causing environmental pollution. So, an EHA was produced
from waste eggshells and was used for grafting clinically. Results of
the current study were associated with a greater rate of bone
regeneration both in SHA- and EHA-grafted sites and the results
are in accordance with similar studies in the literature.20,23
The radiologic evaluation of bone formation is the initiation of
bone formation after grafting of cystic defects marked by radio
opacity. Bone formation pattern was different in both graft materials
FIGURE 5. A, Radiograph after 3 months of synthetic hydroxyapatite grafting.
B, Radiograph after 3 months of eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite grafting.
115
Kattimani et al The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery
FIGURE 6. Radiograph after 6 months showing uniform radio opacity
indicating well-healed lesion on both sides.
at the second month’s interval which may be attributed to early or late
resorption kinetics of graft particles.20 At third and sixth month’s
interval, the pattern of bone formation in both the SHA and
EHA groups, however, remains the same (P > 0.05). All the bone
regeneration parameters were well correlated with the observations of
the study performed by other investigators in the literature.18–20,23
Eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite seems to be promising graft
material with excellent properties for grafting18– 20,23 with viable
various production techniques.25–35 Lack of disease transfer risks,
biocompatibility, and ease of use makes EHA a viable choice as
regenerative material. Eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite is hydro-
philic in nature, absorbed by body fluids and blood, so that handling
becomes easy for placing it in the surgical site. Because of ethical
concerns collection of tissue for histologic examination has
excluded in this study but histologic examination of EHA has been
studied in animal models16–20 and surface modified eggshell in
humans which showed promising results.21 The preliminary reports
of EHA showed good results in humans by Kattimani et al.23 Other
interesting trends for HA include applications in drug delivery, cell
culture, purification of antibodies on industrial scale, as an artificial
blood vessel or trachea, as well as a catheter made of an HA-
composite.51,52 Many bone grafts are being marketed today for
clinical use. Because of newer innovative technology in the pro-
duction and combinations of existing materials for newer appli-
cations is emerging as new field in the bone regeneration for
successful clinical utility.
CONCLUSIONS
Eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite becomes a viable choice as regen-
erative material because of its biocompatibility, lack of disease
transfer risks, ease of use, and unlimited availability of eggshell raw
material. Eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite is a versatile novel bone
graft substitute that yielded promising results within the limitations
116
Copyright © 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Volume 27, Number 1, January 2016
of this study. Eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite is very cost-effective
which can be prepared in a very economical way. It is a worthwhile
bone substitute because it is safe and easily available material and
process involved in the production is environment friendly. This
study warrants a larger sample size with variable age group,
including hisomorphometry to confirm its nature of bone regener-
ation. Further research is going on to use EHA in combination with
collagen, cell factors, platelet-rich plasma, and platelet-rich fibrin
(PRF) lysate for bone repair. The future of EHA graft material
continues to be an expanding topic.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank S.B. Javali for his continued support in
the research.
REFERENCES
1. Kromer H. Bone homografts in minor oral surgery. Proc R Soc Med
1962;55:607–614
2. Damien CJ, Parsons JR. Bone graft and bone graft substitutes: a review
of current technology and applications. J Appl Biomater 1991;2:187–208
3. Habal MB, Reddi AH. Different forms of bone grafts. In: Habal MB,
Reddi AH, eds. Bone Grafts and Bone Substitutes. Philadelphia, PA:
Saunders; 1992:6–8
4. Banwart JC, Asher MA, Hassanein RS. Iliac crest bone graft harvest
donor site morbidity. A statistical evaluation. Spine 1995;20:1055–1060
5. Clavero J, Lundgren S. Ramus or chin grafts for maxillary sinus inlay
and local onlay augmentation: comparison of donor site morbidity and
complications. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:154–160
6. Marx RE, Morales MI. Morbidity from bone harvest in major jaw
reconstruction: a randomized trial comparing the lateral anterior and
posterior approaches to the ilium. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;48:
196–203
7. Hench LL, Wilson J. An Introduction to Bioceramics. Singapore: World
Scientific; 1993
8. Hench LL. Bio ceramics: from concept to clinic. J Am Ceram Soc
1991;74:1487–1510
9. Seth Greenwald A, Boden Scott D, Goldberg Victor M, et al. Bone-graft
substitutes: facts, fictions, and applications. J Bone Joint Surg Am
2001;83:98–103
10. Ripamonti U. Osteoinduction in porous hydroxyapatite implanted in
heterotopic sites of different animal models. Biomaterials 1996;17:31–35
11. Greenwald AS, Boden SD, Goldberg VM, et al. Bone-graft substitutes:
facts, fictions, and applications. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001;83-A:98–103
12. Kasaj A, Willershausen B, Reichert C, et al. Ability of nanocrystalline
hydroxyapatite paste to promote human periodontal ligament cell
proliferation. J Oral Sci 2008;50:279–285
13. El-Ghannam A, Amin H, Nasr T, et al. Enhancement of bone
regeneration and graft material resorption using surface-modified
bioactive glass in cortical and human maxillary cystic bone defects. Int J
Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:184–191
14. Eto AL, Joly JC, Jeffcoat M, et al. Use of anorganic bovine-derived
hydroxyapatite matrix/cell-binding peptide (P-15) in the treatment of
class II furcation defects: a clinical and radiographic study in humans.
J Periodontol 2007;78:2277–2283
15. Palmieri A, Pezzetti F, Spinelli G, et al. PerioGlas regulates osteoblast
RNA interfering. J Prosthodont 2008;17:522–526
16. Dupoirieux L, Pourquier D, Souyris F. Powdered eggshell: a pilot
study on a new bone substitute for use in maxillofacial surgery.
J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1995;23:187–194
17. Dupoirieux L. Ostrich eggshell as a bone substitute: a preliminary report
of its biological behavior in animals: a possibility in facial
reconstructive surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999;37:467–471
18. Park JW, Bae SR, Suh JY, et al. Evaluation of bone healing with
eggshell-derived bone graft substitutes in rat calvaria: a pilot study.
J Biomed Mater Res 2008;87A:203–214
19. Kim SH, Kim W, Cho JH, et al. Comparison of bone formation in rabbits
using hydroxyapatite and b-tricalcium phosphate scaffolds fabricated
from egg shells. Adv Mater Res 2008;47-50:999–1002
# 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery  Volume 27, Number 1, January 2016
20. Lee SW, Kim SG, Balázsi C, et al. Comparative study of hydroxyapatite
from eggshells and synthetic hydroxyapatite for bone regeneration. Oral
Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012;113:348–355
21. Baliga M, Davies P, Dupoirieux L. La poudre de coquille d’oeufdans le
comblement des cavitescystiques des maxillaires. Rev Stomatol Chir
Maxilofac 1998;99:86–88
22. Siva Rama Krishna D, Siddhartan A, Seshadri SK, et al. A novel route
for synthesis of nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite from eggshell waste.
J Mater Sci Mater Med 2007;18:1735–1743
23. Kattimani V, Chakravarthi S, Kanumuru NR, et al. Eggshell derived
hydroxyapatite as bone graft substitute in the healing of maxillary cystic
bone defects: a preliminary report. J Int Oral Health 2014;6:15–19
24. PG Journal Number: 13/2009, publication date 27/03/2009, patent
no.232313. Available at: http://ipindiaservices.gov.in/patent search/
Granted Search/frm Granted Search.aspx/application no. 848/CHE/
2006, Accessed December 8, 2014
25. Meng YH, Tang CY, Tsui CP, et al. Fabrication and characterization of
needle-like nano-HA and HA/MWNT composites. J Mater Sci Mater
Med 2008;19:75–81
26. Rodrigues LR, Motisuke M, Zavaglia CAC. Synthesis of nanostructured
hydroxyapatite: a comparative study between sol-gel and aqueous
solution precipitation. Key Eng Mat 2009;396-398:623–626
27. Wu Y, Lee Y, Chang H. Preparation and characteristics of nanosized
carbonated apatite by urea addition with coprecipitation method. Mater
Sci Eng: C 2009;29:237–241
28. Guo X, Xiao P, Liu J, et al. Fabrication of nanostructured hydroxyapatite
via hydrothermal synthesis and spark plasma sintering. J Am Ceram Soc
2005;88:1026–1029
29. Suchanek WL, Shuk P, Byrappa K, et al. Mechanochemical–
hydrothermal synthesis of carbonated apatite powders at room
temperature. Biomaterials 2002;23:699–710
30. Fathi MH, Mohammadi Zahrani E. Mechanical alloying synthesis and
bioactivity evaluation of nanocrystalline fluoridated hydroxyapatite.
J Cryst Growth 2009;311:1392–1403
31. Silva CC, Graça MPF, Valente MA, et al. Crystallite size study of
nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite and ceramic system with titanium oxide
obtained by dry ball milling. J Mater Sci 2007;42:3851–3855
32. Xu JL, Khor KA, Dong ZL, et al. Preparation and characterization of
nano-sized hydroxyapatite powders produced in a radio frequency (rf)
thermal plasma. Mat Sci Eng A 2004;374:101–108
33. Montalbert-Smith R, Palma CA, Arias JD, et al. Formation of
hydroxyapatite nanosized and other apatites by electrolysis process. Key
Eng Mat 2009;396-398:579–582
34. Liu J, Li K, Wang H, et al. Self-assembly of hydroxyapatite
nanostructures by microwave irradiation. Nanotechnology 2005;16:82
35. Shih W, Chen Y, Wang M, et al. Crystal growth and morphology of the
nano-sized hydroxyapatite powders synthesized from CaHPO42H2O
and CaCO3 by hydrolysis method. J Cryst Growth 2004;270:211–218
36. Kattimani VS, Bajantai NV, Sriram SK, et al. Observer strategy and
radiographic classification of healing after grafting of cystic defects
in maxilla: a radiological appraisal. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14:
227–232
# 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD
Copyright © 2015 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite
37. Kattimani VS, Chakravarthi SP, Neelima Devi KN, et al. Comparative
evaluation of bovine derived hydroxyapatite and synthetic
hydroxyapatite graft in bone regeneration of human maxillary cystic
defects: a clinico-radiological study. Indian J Dent Res 2014;25:
594–601
38. Gosain AK, Song L, Riordan P, et al. A 1-year study of osteoinduction in
hydroxyapatite-derived biomaterials in an adult sheep model: part I.
Plast Reconstr Surg 2002;109:619–630
39. Matsuoka H, Akiyama H, Okada Y, et al. In vitro analysis of the
stimulation of bone formation by highly bioactive apatite-and
wollastonite-containing glass-ceramic: released calcium ions promote
osteogenic differentiation in osteoblastic ROS17/2.8 cells. J Biomed
Mater Res 1999;47:176–188
40. Frayssinet P, Hardy D, Rouquet N, et al. New observations on middle
term hydroxyapatite-coated titanium alloy hip prostheses. Biomaterials
1992;13:668–674
41. Marchac D. Augmentation of the craniofacial skeleton with porous
hydroxyapatite granules. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993;91:23–26
42. Schliephake H, Neukam FW. Bone replacement with porous
hydroxyapatite blocks and titanium screw implants: an experimental
study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:151–156
43. Bifano CA, Edgin WA, Colleton C, et al. Preliminary evaluation of
hydroxyapatite cement as an augmentation device in the edentulous
atrophic canine mandible. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol
Endod 1998;85:512–516
44. Simion M, Jovanovic SA, Trisi P, et al. Vertical ridge augmentation
around dental implants using a membrane technique and autogenous
bone or allografts in humans. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent
1998;18:8–23
45. Kainulainen VT, Sàndor GK, Clokie CM, et al. Intraoral bone harvesting
in oral and maxillofacial surgery. SuomHammaslääkärilehti
2002;5:216–222
46. Hallman M, Lundgren S, Sennerby L. Histologic analysis of clinical
biopsies taken 6 months and 3 years after maxillary sinus floor
augmentation with 80% bovine hydroxyapatite and 20% autogenous
bone mixed with fibrin glue. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2001;3:87–96
47. Porter AE, Patel Nelesh, Skepper JN, et al. Effect of sintered silicate-
substituted hydroxyapatite on remodelling processes at the bone-
implant interface. Biomaterials 2004;25:3303–3314
48. Tas AC. Synthesis of biomimetic Ca-hydroxyapatite powders at 37
degrees C in synthetic body fluids. Biomaterials 2000;21:1429–1438
49. Gu YW, Khor KA, Cheang P. Bone-like apatite layer formation on
hydroxyapatite prepared by spark plasma sintering (SPS). Biomaterials
2004;25:4127–4134
50. Ragel CV, Vallet-Regi M, Rodriguez-Lorenzo LM. Preparation and in
vitro bioactivity of hydroxyapatite/solgel glass biphasic material.
Biomaterials 2002;23:1865–1872
51. Hilbrig F, Freitag R. Isolation and purification of recombinant proteins,
antibodies and plasmid DNA with hydroxyapatite chromatography.
Biotechnol J 2012;7:90–102
52. Nakamura T, Ohmori K, Kanemaru S. Tissue-engineered airway and ‘‘in
situ tissue engineering’’. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011;59:91–97
117