Top

International Journal of Implant Dentistry

Published in:

01-12-2020 | Sinus Lift | Research

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

Authors: Heitor Fontes da Silva, Douglas Rangel Goulart, Alexander Tadeu Sverzut, Sergio Olate, Márcio de Moraes

Published in: International Journal of Implant Dentistry | Issue 1/2020

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.

Esposito M, Felice P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;5:CD008397. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008397.CrossRef

Moon JW, Sohn DS, Heo JU, Kim JS. Comparison of two kinds of bovine bone in maxillary sinus augmentation: a histomorphometric study. Implant Dent. 2015;24(1):19–24. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000187.CrossRefPubMed

Al-Dajani M. Recent trends in sinus lift surgery and their clinical implications. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016;18(1):204–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12275.CrossRefPubMed

Xavier SP, Dias RR, Sehn FP, Kahn A, Chaushu L, Chaushu G. Maxillary sinus grafting with autograft vs. fresh frozen allograft: a split-mouth histomorphometric study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(9):1080–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12404.CrossRefPubMed

Ahmet S, Alper Gultekin B, Karabuda ZC, Olgac V. Two composite bone graft substitutes for maxillary sinus floor augmentation: histological, histomorphometric, and radiographic analyses. Implant Dent. 2016;25(3):313–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000378.CrossRefPubMed

Schwartz Z, Weesner T, van Dijk S, Cochran DL, Mellonig JT, Lohmann CH, Carnes DL, Goldstein M, Dean DD, Boyan BD. Ability of deproteinized cancellous bovine bone to induce new bone formation. J Periodontol. 2000;71(8):1258–69.CrossRef

Panagiotou D, Özkan Karaca E, Dirikan İpçi Ş, Çakar G, Olgaç V, Yılmaz S. Comparison of two different xenografts in bilateral sinus augmentation: radiographic and histologic findings. Quintessence Int. 2015;46(7):611–9. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a33686.CrossRefPubMed

Annibali S, Iezzi G, Sfasciotti GL, Cristalli MP, Vozza I, Mangano C, La Monaca G, Polimeni A. Histological and histomorphometric human results of HA-Beta-TCP 30/70 compared to three different biomaterials in maxillary sinus augmentation at 6 months: a preliminary report. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:156850. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/156850.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Calasans-Maia MD, Mourão CF, Alves AT, Sartoretto SC, de Uzeda MJ, Granjeiro JM. Maxillary sinus augmentation with a new xenograft: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(Suppl 2):e586–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12289.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Lee JH, Kim JH, Jeon JH. Bone regeneration of macropore octacalcium phosphate-coated deproteinized bovine bone materials in sinus augmentation: a prospective pilot study. Implant Dent. 2015;24(3):275–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000249.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Saklad M. Grading of patients for surgical procedures. Anesthesiology. 1941;2:281–4.CrossRef

12.

Tatum H Jr. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dentistry Clinical North America. 1986;30:207–29.

13.

Aa H, Sbm P, Kohal RJ, Gubik S, Strohl C, Stampf S, Alexander A, Maria B. Effect of two different healing times on the mineralization of newly formed bone using a bovine bone substitute in sinus floor augmentation: a randomized , controlled , clinical and histological investigation; 2015. p. 1052.

14.

Tanaka H, Toyoshima T, Atsuta I, Ayukawa Y, Sasaki M, Matsushita Y, Hiraoka R, Koyano K, Nakamura S. Additional effects of platelet-rich fibrin on bone regeneration in sinus augmentation with deproteinized bovine bone mineral: preliminary results. Implant Dent. 2015.

15.

Maniatopoulos C, Rodriguez A, Deporter DA, Melcher AH. An improved method for preparing histological sections of metallic implants. Int J Oral Maxillo Fac Implants. 1986;1:31–7.

16.

Parfitt AM, Drezner MK, Glorieux FH, Kanis JA, Malluche H, Meunier PJ, Ott SM, Rec-Ker RR. Bone histomorphometry: stan- dardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units. Report of the ASBMR Histomorphometry Nomenclature Committee. J Bone Mineral Res. 1987;2:595–610.CrossRef

17.

Silva HF, Abuna RPF, Lopes HB, Francischini MS, de Oliveira PT, Rosa AL, Beloti MM. Participation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 in osteoblast and adipocyte differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells grown on titanium surfaces. Eur J Oral Sci. 2017;125(5):355–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12369.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Rosa AL, Kato RB, Castro Raucci LM, Teixeira LN, de Oliveira FS, Bellesini LS, de Oliveira PT, Hassan MQ, Beloti MM. Nanotopography drives stem cell fate toward osteoblast differentiation through α1β1 integrin signaling pathway. J Cell Biochem. 2014;115(3):540–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcb.24688.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Schmitt CM, Moest T, Lutz R, Neukam FW, Schlegel KA. Anorganic bovine bone (ABB) vs. autologous bone (AB) plus ABB in maxillary sinus grafting. A prospective non-randomized clinical and histomorphometrical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(9):1043–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12396.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Mordenfeld A, Lindgren C, Hallman M. Sinus floor augmentation using Straumann® BoneCeramic™ and Bio-Oss® in a split mouth design and later placement of implants: a 5-year report from a longitudinal study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016;18(5):926–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12374.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M. Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(Suppl):237–59.PubMed

22.

Meloni SM, Jovanovic SA, Lolli FM, Cassisa C, De Riu G, Pisano M, Lumbau A, Lugliè PF, Tullio A. Grafting after sinus lift with anorganic bovine bone alone compared with 50:50 anorganic bovine bone and autologous bone: results of a pilot randomised trial at one year. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53(5):436–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2015.02.012.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Schlegel KA, Fichtner G, Schultze-Mosgau S, Wiltfang J. Histologic findings in sinus augmentation with autogenous bone chips versus a bovine bone substitute. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18:53–8.PubMed

24.

Al-Nawas B, Schiegnitz E. Augmentation procedures using bone substitute materials or autogenous bone – a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7(Suppl2):S219–34.PubMed

25.

Sverzut AT, Rodrigues DC, Lauria A, Armando RS, de Oliveira PT, Moreira RW. Clinical, radiographic, and histological analyses of calcium phosphate cement as filling material in maxillary sinus lift surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(6):633–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12346.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Alayan J, Vaquette C, Saifzadeh S, Hutmacher D, Ivanovski S. A histomorphometric assessment of collagen-stabilized anorganic bovine bone mineral in maxillary sinus augmentation - a randomized controlled trial in sheep. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(6):734–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12652.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Klüppel LE, Antonini F, Olate S, Nascimento FF, Albergaria-Barbosa JR, Mazzonetto R. Bone repair is influenced by different particle sizes of anorganic bovine bone matrix: a histologic and radiographic study in vivo. J Craniofac Surg. 2013;24:1074–7.CrossRef

28.

John HD, Wenz B. Histomorphometric analysis of natural bone mineral for maxillary sinus floor augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:199–207.PubMed

29.

Froum SJ, Wallace SS, Elian N, Cho SC, Tarnow DP. Comparison of mineralized cancellous boné allograft (puros) and anorganic bovine boné matrix (Bio-Oss®) for sinus augmen- tation: histomorphometry at 26–32 weeks after grafting. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2006;26:543–51.PubMed

30.

Di Stefano DA, Gastaldi G, Vinci R, Cinci L, Pieri L, Gherlone E. Histomorphometric comparison of enzyme-deantigenic equine bone and anorganic bovine bone in sinus augmentation: a randomized clinical trial with 3-year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(5):1161–7. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4057.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Parra M, Atala-Acevedo C, Fariña R, Haidar ZS, Zaror C, Olate S. Graftless maxillary sinus lift using lateral window approach: a systematic review. Implant Dent. 2018;27:111–8.CrossRef

32.

Parra M, Olate S, Cantin M. Clinical and biological analysis in graftless maxillary sinus lift. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;43:214–20.CrossRef

33.

Jensen T, Schou S, Stavropoulos A, Terheyden H, Holmstrup P. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with Bio-Oss or Bio-Oss mixed with autogenous bone as graft inanimals: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41(1):114–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2011.08.010.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Comparison of two anorganic bovine bone in maxillary sinus lift: a split-mouth study with clinical, radiographical, and histomorphometrical analysis
Authors: Heitor Fontes da Silva
Douglas Rangel Goulart
Alexander Tadeu Sverzut
Sergio Olate
Márcio de Moraes
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Sinus Lift
Sinus Lift
Published in: International Journal of Implant Dentistry / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 2198-4034
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-00214-w

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

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

Abstract

Background

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Antibiotic prescribing habits of the clinicians dealing with dental implant surgery in Turkey: a questionnaire study

Influence of rigidity of retainers on dynamic behavior of implant-supported removable partial dentures

A fixed reconstruction of fully edentulous patients with immediate function using an apically tapered implant design: a retrospective clinical study

Hybrid-abutment-restoration: effect of material type on torque maintenance and fracture resistance after thermal aging

Guided bone regeneration in staged vertical and horizontal bone augmentation using platelet-rich fibrin associated with bone grafts: a retrospective clinical study

Clinical feasibility and benefits of a tapered, sand-blasted, and acid-etched surfaced tissue-level dental implant