Literature DB >> 27129584

Histological and radiological evaluation of sintered and non-sintered deproteinized bovine bone substitute materials in sinus augmentation procedures. A prospective, randomized-controlled, clinical multicenter study.

Tim Fienitz1, Ofer Moses2, Christoph Klemm1, Arndt Happe3, Daniel Ferrari4, Matthias Kreppel1, Zeev Ormianer5, Moti Gal6, Daniel Rothamel7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to histologically and radiologically compare a sintered and a non-sintered bovine bone substitute material in sinus augmentation procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three patients were included in the clinically controlled randomized multicentre study resulting in a total of 44 treated sinuses. After lateral approach, sinuses were filled with either a sintered (SBM, Alpha Bio's Graft®) or a non-sintered (NSBM, Bio Oss®) deproteinized bovine bone substitute material. The augmentation sites were radiologically assessed before and immediately after the augmentation procedure as well as prior to implant placement. Bone trephine biopsies for histological analysis were harvested 6 months after augmentation whilst preparing the osteotomies for implant placement.
RESULTS: Healing was uneventful in all patients. After 6 months, radiological evaluation of 43 sinuses revealed a residual augmentation height of 94.65 % (±2.74) for SBM and 95.76 % (±2.15) for NSBM. One patient left the study for personal reasons. Histological analysis revealed a percentage of new bone of 29.71 % (±13.67) for SBM and 30.57 % (±16.07) for NSBM. Residual bone substitute material averaged at 40.68 % (±16.32) for SBM compared to 43.43 % (±19.07) for NSBM. All differences between the groups were not statistically significant (p > 0.05, Student's t test).
CONCLUSION: Both xenogeneic bone substitute materials showed comparable results regarding new bone formation and radiological height changes in external sinus grafting procedures. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Both bone substitute materials allow for a predictable new bone formation following sinus augmentation procedures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Augmentation; Bone substitute; Implantology; Sintering; Sinuslift; Xenograft

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27129584     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-016-1829-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  21 in total

Review 1.  Augmentation procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous ridges with oral implants.

Authors:  Matteo Chiapasco; Marco Zaniboni; Maurizio Boisco
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 5.977

Review 2.  Bone augmentation techniques.

Authors:  Bradley S McAllister; Kamran Haghighat
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 6.993

Review 3.  Sinus lift grafts and endosseous implants. Treatment of the atrophic posterior maxilla.

Authors:  D G Smiler; P W Johnson; J L Lozada; C Misch; J L Rosenlicht; O H Tatum; J R Wagner
Journal:  Dent Clin North Am       Date:  1992-01

4.  High-Temperature Sintering of Xenogeneic Bone Substitutes Leads to Increased Multinucleated Giant Cell Formation: In Vivo and Preliminary Clinical Results.

Authors:  Mike Barbeck; Samuel Udeabor; Jonas Lorenz; Markus Schlee; Marzellus Grosse Holthaus; Nina Raetscho; Joseph Choukroun; Robert Sader; C James Kirkpatrick; Shahram Ghanaati
Journal:  J Oral Implantol       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 1.779

Review 5.  Sinus augmentation. Rationale, development, long-term results.

Authors:  O H Tatum; M S Lebowitz; C A Tatum; R A Borgner
Journal:  N Y State Dent J       Date:  1993-05

6.  Long-term success of sinus augmentation using a synthetic alloplast: a 20 patients, 7 years clinical report.

Authors:  Stan J Butz; Luc W J Huys
Journal:  Implant Dent       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.454

7.  Morbidity of harvesting of chin grafts: a prospective study.

Authors:  E Nkenke; S Schultze-Mosgau; M Radespiel-Tröger; F Kloss; F W Neukam
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 5.977

8.  Severely resorbed mandible treated with iliac crest autogenous bone graft and dental implants: 17-year follow-up.

Authors:  Ofer Moses; Carlos E Nemcovsky; Yair Langer; Haim Tal
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2007 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 9.  Volume changes of maxillary sinus augmentations over time: a systematic review.

Authors:  Siddharth Shanbhag; Vivek Shanbhag; Andreas Stavropoulos
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 10.  Graft-free sinus augmentation procedure: a literature review.

Authors:  Ginnady Pinchasov; Gintaras Juodzbalys
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2014-04-01
View more
  9 in total

1.  Influence of different carrier materials on biphasic calcium phosphate induced bone regeneration.

Authors:  Lara Schorn; Tim Fienitz; Maximilian F Gerstenberg; Anja Sterner-Kock; Alexandra C Maul; Julian Lommen; Henrik Holtmann; Daniel Rothamel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Comparison of Material-mediated Bone Regeneration Capacities of Sintered and Non-sintered Xenogeneic Bone Substitutes via 2D and 3D Data.

Authors:  Eleni Kapogianni; Mike Barbeck; Tim Fienitz; Daniel Rothamel; Ole Jung; Aylin Arslan; Lennart Kuhnel; Xin Xiong; Rumen Krastev; Reinhard E. Friedrich; Reinhard Schnettler
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2019 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  Comparison of Two Xenograft Materials Used in Sinus Lift Procedures: Material Characterization and In Vivo Behavior.

Authors:  María Piedad Ramírez Fernández; Patricia Mazón; Sergio A Gehrke; Jose Luis Calvo-Guirado; Piedad N De Aza
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 3.623

4.  SEM-EDX Study of the Degradation Process of Two Xenograft Materials Used in Sinus Lift Procedures.

Authors:  María Piedad Ramírez Fernández; Sergio A Gehrke; Carlos Pérez Albacete Martinez; Jose L Calvo Guirado; Piedad N de Aza
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  Granular honeycomb scaffolds composed of carbonate apatite for simultaneous intra- and inter-granular osteogenesis and angiogenesis.

Authors:  Koichiro Hayashi; Toshiki Yanagisawa; Masaya Shimabukuro; Ryo Kishida; Kunio Ishikawa
Journal:  Mater Today Bio       Date:  2022-03-26

6.  Influence of Xenogeneic and Alloplastic Carriers for Bone Augmentation on Human Unrestricted Somatic Stem Cells.

Authors:  Lara Schorn; Anna Sine; Karin Berr; Jörg Handschel; Rita Depprich; Norbert R Kübler; Christoph Sproll; Majeed Rana; Julian Lommen
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 3.748

7.  Effects of Scaffold Shape on Bone Regeneration: Tiny Shape Differences Affect the Entire System.

Authors:  Koichiro Hayashi; Toshiki Yanagisawa; Ryo Kishida; Kunio Ishikawa
Journal:  ACS Nano       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 18.027

Review 8.  Facial Bone Reconstruction Using both Marine or Non-Marine Bone Substitutes: Evaluation of Current Outcomes in a Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Marco Cicciù; Gabriele Cervino; Alan Scott Herford; Fausto Famà; Ennio Bramanti; Luca Fiorillo; Floriana Lauritano; Sergio Sambataro; Giuseppe Troiano; Luigi Laino
Journal:  Mar Drugs       Date:  2018-01-13       Impact factor: 5.118

9.  Morphometric evaluation of bone regeneration in segmental mandibular bone defects filled with bovine bone xenografts in a split-mouth rabbit model.

Authors:  Mariana Quirino Silveira Soares; Jeroen Van Dessel; Reinhilde Jacobs; Renato Yassutaka Faria Yaedú; Eduardo Sant'Ana; Danilo da Silva Corrêa; Maria Fernanda Conceição Madeira; Marco Antônio Húngaro Duarte; Izabel Regina Fischer Rubira-Bullen
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2019-09-10
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.