Histomorphometric outcomes after lateral sinus floor elevation procedure: a systematic review of the literature and meta‐analysis

Abstract

Based on histomorphometric evaluation, AB should still be taken into consideration when the highest possible new bone formation is the primary aim in maxillary sinus surgery. When donor site morbidity is a concern, BB and a mixture of TCP and HA could be considered as predictable, showing promising results. More comparative histologic studies are needed to confirm such results.

Comparison of Two Xenograft Materials Used in Sinus Lift Procedures: Material Characterization and <em>in Vivo</em> Behavior

“…The aforementioned properties of the graft material have led researchers to choose bovine bone material as the gold standard of xenografts because ithas been demonstrated to be a biologically inert osteoconductive material for sinus augmentation procedures [ 52] Biocompatibility, osteoconduction and low rate resorption after surgery are favorable properties of xenografts, but long-term studies must be carried out to understand xenografts' pattern of biodegradation and its influence on bone gain [ 50].…”

Surgeons’ Performance Determining the Amount of Graft Material for Sinus Floor Augmentation Using Tomography

“…This procedure is well documented, with long-term success in Implantology (2,(8)(9)(10). However, success in such a procedure is not always possible.…”

“…Every graft material has a specific indication; however, all are used to provide proper support for the clot during the early healing phase, apart from supporting the bone regeneration process by direct or indirect stimulation (2).…”

Long‐term stability of autologous bone graft of intraoral origin after lateral sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement

“…With a residual bone height greater than 5 mm, the transcrestal approach is usually preferred; otherwise, when the residual bone height is 5 mm or less, lateral window approach with or without the use of autologous bone is indicated. 15 Although histomorphometric outcomes of various graft materials used for maxillary sinus augmentation have shown considerable differences, 16 there is no convincing evidence that either implant survival or marginal bone loss are strictly dependent on the type of bone graft used in sinus augmentation. 15 Bone substitutes made of synthetic, allogenic, or xenogenic bone have also been widely used for sinus augmentation.…”

“…9,[11][12][13][14] The use of autogenous bone grafts has a long history of clinical success in sinus augmentation procedures due to its unique osteoinductive, osteoconductive, and osteogenic properties. [12][13][14][15][16] Longitudinal randomized controlled trials of large sample size for the evaluation of clinical outcome and efficacy of these different types of bone grafting materials used in sinus augmentation are still scarce, and according to many clinicians autogenous bone graft is still considered the "gold standard." 15 Although histomorphometric outcomes of various graft materials used for maxillary sinus augmentation have shown considerable differences, 16 there is no convincing evidence that either implant survival or marginal bone loss are strictly dependent on the type of bone graft used in sinus augmentation.…”