Comparison of two anorganic bovine bone in maxillary sinus lift: a split-mouth study with clinical, radiographical, and histomorphometrical analysis

Abstract

Background Anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss®) has been extensively used for reconstruction of posterior area of maxilla in sinus lift procedure; however, a new graft material (Lumina-Bone Porous®), that has a different manufacturing process, has not been yet compared in clinical and histological terms. The manufacturing process of bovine bone graft is related to size and porosity of the particles, and this can change osteoconductive property of the material and bone formation. The use of Lumina-Porus® could improve bone formation, reduce the remaining particles of the biomaterial using a low-cost material. The aim of this research was to compare the clinical, radiological, and histomorphometrical results from maxillary sinus lift with two different anorganic bovine bone substitutes Bio-Oss® (control) and Lumina-Bone Porous® (test). Results A split-mouth study was performed with 13 volunteers. The mean bone ridge height in the deepest portion of maxillary sinuses floor was 3.11 ± 0.83 mm in the Bio-Oss® and 2.38 ± 0.75 mm in the Lumina-Bone Porous®. After sinus lift, the Bio-Oss® group shows bone ridge height of 11.56 ± 2.03 mm and Lumina-Bone® of 10.62 ± 1.93 mm. The increase in alveolar bone height scores was significant between pre-augmentation and 6 months after SL in both groups (p < 0.001). No statistical significant difference in newly formed bone in the Bio-Oss® group (20.4 ± 5.4%), and Lumina-Bone Porous® (22.8 ± 8.5%) was histomorphological observed (p > 0.05). On the other hand, the residual graft particles showed significant difference between the Bio-Oss® group (19.9 ± 8.6%) and Lumina-Bone Porous® (14.6 ± 5.6%) (p < 0.05). The survival rate of dental implants for augmented area with Lumina Bone Porous® was 88.88%, while for Bio-Oss® group was 100%. Conclusion Both materials Bio-Oss® and Lumina-Bone Porous® can be used in the maxillary sinus floor augmentation with good predictability in clinical, radiographical, and histological point of view.

Radiographic and Histomorphometric Evaluation of Biomaterials Used for Lateral Sinus Augmentation: A Systematic Review on the Effect of Residual Bone Height and Vertical Graft Size on New Bone Formation and Graft Shrinkage

“…Following the reading of the titles and the abstracts, 3135 were excluded; the remaining 214 were examined using the full text. This research phase excluded 193 articles because they did not comply with the eligibility criteria and made it possible to include a total of 21 publications [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. Reasons for exclusion are reported in Supplementary Table S1 and Figure 1 .…”

Levantamento de seio maxilar seguido de instalação imediata de implante do tipo cone morse: relato de caso

“…Um estudo relatou que a elevação do seio maxilar com substitutos ósseos sintéticos apresenta altas taxas de sobrevivência de supra estruturas e implantes sem diferenças significativas em comparação com enxerto ósseo autógeno ou xenoenxerto10. Em contrapartida, os substitutos ósseos como o enxerto xenógeno, são os mais escolhidos pelos cirurgiões-dentistas, pois evitam a utilização de um segundo local cirúrgico, diminuindo a morbidade da área doadora e sem limitação em relação à quantidade de material disponível 7,2 .…”

“…A ausência de um elemento dentário leva os pacientes a buscarem alternativas imediatas para a reposição do órgão perdido2. Quando ocorre a perda de um ou mais dentes, inicia-se um processo de remodelação óssea que regularmente impossibilita a reabilitação dos espaços edêntulos com implantes 2 . Desse modo devem-se utilizar meios de reposição óssea com materiais autógenos, heterógenos ou aloplásticos 3 .…”

Vertical Bone Gain after Sinus Lift Procedures with Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate and Simultaneous Implant Placement—A Cross-Sectional Study

“…However, in the upper jaw, particularly in the posterior area, implants can be a real challenge due to the proximity of the maxillary sinus that can get pneumatized sometimes due to the low bone density in this region [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. Various treatment options have been proposed to address this problem and they include the use of short implants, placement of angled implants, zygomatic implants, pterygoid implants, as well as maxillary sinus floor elevation [ 3 , 4 ], which is considered as one of the most predictable treatment modality in these situations [ 6 ]. A sinus lift can be performed by placing an autogenous, allogeneic, heterologous, or alloplastic graft material [ 3 , 5 , 7 ].…”

“…Various treatment options have been proposed to address this problem and they include the use of short implants, placement of angled implants, zygomatic implants, pterygoid implants, as well as maxillary sinus floor elevation [ 3 , 4 ], which is considered as one of the most predictable treatment modality in these situations [ 6 ]. A sinus lift can be performed by placing an autogenous, allogeneic, heterologous, or alloplastic graft material [ 3 , 5 , 7 ]. Initially, autogenous bone grafts were considered to be the “gold standard” material for oral implantology but studies have shown that autografts may not be routinely needed for sinus lift procedures.…”