Literature DB >> 27107475

Maxillary sinus grafting with fresh frozen allograft versus bovine bone mineral: A tomographic and histological study.

Samuel Porfirio Xavier1, Thiago de Santana Santos2, Felipe Perraro Sehn1, Erick Ricardo Silva1, João de Andrade Garcez-Filho3, Paulo Ricardo Saquete Martins-Filho4.   

Abstract

We evaluated histologically and tomographically the effects of fresh frozen bone allograft (FFB) or bovine bone mineral (BBM) in maxillary sinus floor augmentations. In total, 30 maxillary sinuses from 30 patients (mean age = 51.17 ± 10.86 years) underwent sinus augmentation. Patients were divided in two test groups (15 sinuses each). The first group was grafted with allograft bone, and the second group received bovine bone mineral. After 6 months, bone samples from each group were collected for histological examination. Implant survival rates were 97.78% (FFB group) and 100% (BBM group) 6 months after functional loading. Median volumetric reductions of 31.2% (11.33-40.56) and 12.22% (9.91-20.59) were observed in the FFB and BBM groups, respectively. Comparisons between the groups for differences in initial and final volumes of bone (p = 0.015) and the rate of resorption (p = 0.009) showed statistically significant differences. The FFB group showed osteoblastic cells in close contact with osteoid matrix, connected through bridges between allograft bone particles and new bone formation. The BBM group showed BBM particles in close contact with new bone, with visible osteoid matrix bridges and osteoblastic cells surrounding it. None showed signs of acute or chronic inflammatory infiltrate. Despite better results with BBM, both FFB and BBM in maxillary sinus augmentation resulted in high percentages of new bone formation, and allowed implant placement with a low rate of failure of osseointegration at a 6-month follow-up.
Copyright © 2016 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone substitutes; Computed tomography; Histological analysis; Maxillary sinus floor elevation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27107475     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.03.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg        ISSN: 1010-5182            Impact factor:   2.078


  4 in total

1.  Physicochemical Characterization of Five Different Bone Graft Substitutes Used in Periodontal Regeneration: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Aiswarya Anil; Arun Sadasivan; Elizabeth Koshi
Journal:  J Int Soc Prev Community Dent       Date:  2020-09-28

2.  Hydrophilicity, Viscoelastic, and Physicochemical Properties Variations in Dental Bone Grafting Substitutes.

Authors:  Branko Trajkovski; Matthias Jaunich; Wolf-Dieter Müller; Florian Beuer; Gregory-George Zafiropoulos; Alireza Houshmand
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.623

3.  Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation Using an Equine-Derived Graft Material: Preliminary Results in 17 Patients.

Authors:  F Rivara; M Negri; S Lumetti; L Parisi; A Toffoli; E Calciolari; E Manfredi; G M Macaluso
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Influence of different incision designs on bone increment of guided bone regeneration (Bio-Gide collagen membrane +Bio-OSS bone powder) during the same period of maxillary anterior tooth implantation.

Authors:  Genying Zhuang; Jianshui Mao; Guoli Yang; Huiming Wang
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 3.269

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.