Fatma Kandel1, Mohamed Shawky2, Amr Gibaly3, Mohamed Mounir4, Niveen Askar4, Mohammed Atef4. 1. Department of Oral Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Egyptian Russian University, Badr City, Egypt. 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, Egypt. amrgibaly@dent.bsu.edu.eg. 4. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The present study compared the absorbable gelatin sponge as a space-filling material versus anorganic bone bovine mineral (ABBM) in maxillary sinus augmentation with simultaneous endosseous dental implant placement. METHODS: Eighteen maxillary sinus floor elevation cases were randomly allocated into two groups. The first group received ABBM, while the second group received an absorbable gelatin sponge as a space-filling material. For both groups, CBCT scans were obtained immediately postoperatively and six months later to calculate the difference in sinus floor bone gain. Osstell readings were recorded both at the time of implant placement and implant exposure with a total of twenty-three dental implant placements in relation to the eighteen elevated sinus floors. RESULTS: The mean radiographic sinus floor gain in the ABBM group was 10.2 mm (± 2.5), while in the absorbable gelatin sponge group was 5.4 mm (± 2.0), with a mean difference of 4.8, which was statistically significant (p < 0.001). The mean implant stability for the ABBM was 77.3 (± 4.9), while in the absorbable gelatin sponge group was 74.2 (± 3.0), with a mean difference of 3.1, which was statistically insignificant (p = 0.1610). CONCLUSION: The ABBM showed superior results regarding the amount of radiographic sinus floor bone gain. However, the implant stability was invariable between both groups.
PURPOSE: The present study compared the absorbable gelatin sponge as a space-filling material versus anorganic bone bovine mineral (ABBM) in maxillary sinus augmentation with simultaneous endosseous dental implant placement. METHODS: Eighteen maxillary sinus floor elevation cases were randomly allocated into two groups. The first group received ABBM, while the second group received an absorbable gelatin sponge as a space-filling material. For both groups, CBCT scans were obtained immediately postoperatively and six months later to calculate the difference in sinus floor bone gain. Osstell readings were recorded both at the time of implant placement and implant exposure with a total of twenty-three dental implant placements in relation to the eighteen elevated sinus floors. RESULTS: The mean radiographic sinus floor gain in the ABBM group was 10.2 mm (± 2.5), while in the absorbable gelatin sponge group was 5.4 mm (± 2.0), with a mean difference of 4.8, which was statistically significant (p < 0.001). The mean implant stability for the ABBM was 77.3 (± 4.9), while in the absorbable gelatin sponge group was 74.2 (± 3.0), with a mean difference of 3.1, which was statistically insignificant (p = 0.1610). CONCLUSION: The ABBM showed superior results regarding the amount of radiographic sinus floor bone gain. However, the implant stability was invariable between both groups.
Authors: Christian M Schmitt; Tobias Moest; Rainer Lutz; Friedrich W Neukam; Karl Andreas Schlegel Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 5.977