Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A radiographical study on the changes in height of grafting materials after sinus lift: a comparison between two types of xenogenic materials

  • Hieu, Pham-Duong (Department of Periodontology, Dankook University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Chung, Jin-Hyung (Department of Periodontology, Dankook University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Yim, Sung-Bin (Department of Periodontology, Dankook University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Hong, Ki-Seok (Department of Periodontology, Dankook University College of Dentistry)
  • Published : 2010.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The performance of implant surgery in the posterior maxilla often poses a challenge due to insufficient available bone. Sinus floor elevation was developed to increase the needed vertical height to overcome this problem. However, grafting materials used for the sinus lift technique eventually show resorption. The present study radiographically compared and evaluated the changes in height of the grafting materials after carrying out maxillary sinus elevation with a window opening procedure. This study also evaluated the difference between two xenogenic bone materials when being used for the sinus lifting procedure. Methods: Twenty-one patients were recruited for this study and underwent a sinus lift procedure. All sites were treated with either bovine bone (Bio-$Oss^{(R)}$) with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or bovine bone (OCS-$B^{(R)}$)/PRP. A total of 69 implants were placed equally 6-8 months after the sinus lift. All sites were clinically and radiographically evaluated right after the implant surgery, 7-12 months, 13-24 months, and 25-48 months after their prosthetic loading. Results: Changes of implant length/bone length with time showed a statistically significant decreasing tendency (P<0.05). There was no significant change in the Bio-$Oss^{(R)}$ group (P>0.05). In contrast, the OCS-$B^{(R)}$ group showed a significant decrease with time (P<0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions: The results showed that there was significant reduction in comparison with data right after placement, after 7 to 12 months, 13 to 24 months, and over 25 months; however, reduction rates between each period have shown to be without significance. No significant difference in height change was observed between the Bio-$Oss^{(R)}$ and the OCS-$B^{(R)}$ groups.

Keywords

References

  1. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Branemark PI, Jemt T. Longterm follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347-59.
  2. Albrektsson T, Dahl E, Enbom L, Engevall S, Engquist B, Eriksson AR, et al. Osseointegrated oral implants: a Swedish multicenter study of 8139 consecutively inserted Nobelpharma implants. J Periodontol 1988;59:287-96. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1988.59.5.287
  3. Chanavaz M. Maxillary sinus: anatomy, physiology, surgery, and bone grafting related to implantology: eleven years of surgical experience (1979-1990). J Oral Implantol 1990;16:199-209.
  4. Rosen MD, Sarnat BG. Change of volume of the maxillary sinus of the dog after extraction of adjacent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1955;8:420-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(55)90111-0
  5. Tatum H Jr. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dent Clin North Am 1986;30:207-29.
  6. Misch CE. Bone character: second vital implant criterion. Dent Today 1988;7:39-40.
  7. Lekholom U, Zarb GA. Patient selection and preparation. In: Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, editors. Tissueintegrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence; 1985. p.199-220.
  8. Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980;38:613-6.
  9. Jensen J, Simonsen EK, Sindet-Pedersen S. Reconstruction of the severely resorbed maxilla with bone grafting and osseointegrated implants: a preliminary report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:27-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(90)90175-2
  10. Adell R, Lekholm U, Grondahl K, Branemark PI, Lindstrom J, Jacobsson M. Reconstruction of severely resorbed edentulous maxillae using osseointegrated fixtures in immediate autogenous bone grafts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:233-46.
  11. Isaksson S. Evaluation of three bone grafting techniques for severly resorbed maxillae in conjunction with immediate endosseous implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:679-88.
  12. Kahnberg KE, Nystrom E, Bartholdsson L. Combined use of bone grafts and Branemark fixtures in the treatment of severely resorbed maxillae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;4:297-304.
  13. Summers RB. A new concept in maxillary implant surgery: the osteotome technique. Compendium 1994;15:152-8.
  14. Summers RB. The osteotome technique. Part 3: Less invasive methods of elevating the sinus floor. Compendium 1994;15:698-704.
  15. Buchmann R, Khoury F, Faust C, Lange DE. Peri-implant conditions in periodontally compromised patients following maxillary sinus augmentation. A long-term post-therapy trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:103-10. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100204.x
  16. Nabers CL, O'Leary TJ. Autogenous bone transplants in the treatment of osseous defects. J Periodontol 1965;36:5-14. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1965.36.1.5
  17. Dragoo MR, Sullivan HC. A clinical and histological evaluation of autogenous iliac bone grafts in humans. I: Wound healing 2 to 8 months. J Periodontol 1973;44:599-613. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1973.44.10.599
  18. Nishibori M, Betts NJ, Salama H, Listgarten MA. Short-term healing of autogenous and allogeneic bone grafts after sinus augmentation: a report of 2 cases. J Periodontol 1994;65:958-66. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1994.65.10.958
  19. McAllister BS, Margolin MD, Cogan AG, Buck D, Hollinger JO, Lynch SE. Eighteen-month radiographic and histologic evaluation of sinus grafting with anorganic bovine bone in the chimpanzee. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:361-8.
  20. Wanschitz F, Figl M, Wagner A, Rolf E. Measurement of volume changes after sinus floor augmentation with a phycogenic hydroxyapatite. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:433-8.
  21. Hatano N, Shimizu Y, Ooya K. A clinical long-term radiographic evaluation of graft height changes after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with a 2:1 autogenous bone/xenograft mixture and simultaneous placement of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:339-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00996.x
  22. Cho SH, Kim OS. Radiographic change of grafted sinus floor after maxillary sinus floor elevation and placement of dental implant. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2006;36:345-59. https://doi.org/10.5051/jkape.2006.36.2.345
  23. Keller EE, Eckert SE, Tolman DE. Maxillary antral and nasal one-stage inlay composite bone graft: preliminary report on 30 recipient sites. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1994;52:438-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(94)90335-2
  24. Blomqvist JE, Alberius P, Isaksson S. Retrospective analysis of one-stage maxillary sinus augmentation with endosseous implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:512-21.
  25. Hallman M, Hedin M, Sennerby L, Lundgren S. A prospective 1-year clinical and radiographic study of implants placed after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with bovine hydroxyapatite and autogenous bone. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002;60:277-84. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2002.30576
  26. Jaffin RA, Berman CL. The excessive loss of Branemark fixtures in type IV bone: a 5-year analysis. J Periodontol 1991;62:2-4. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1991.62.1.2
  27. Friberg B, Jemt T, Lekholm U. Early failures in 4,641 consecutively placed Branemark dental implants: a study from stage 1 surgery to the connection of completed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:142-6.
  28. Jemt T, Lekholm U. Implant treatment in edentulous maxillae: a 5-year follow-up report on patients with different degrees of jaw resorption. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:303-11.
  29. Bahat O. Treatment planning and placement of implants in the posterior maxillae: report of 732 consecutive Nobelpharma implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:151-61.
  30. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  31. Hurzeler MB, Kirsch A, Ackermann KL, Quinones CR. Reconstruction of the severely resorbed maxilla with dental implants in the augmented maxillary sinus: a 5-year clinical investigation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:466-75.
  32. Coombs CJ, Mutimer KL, Holmes AD, Levant BA, Courtemanche DJ, Clement JG. Osseointegration in sinus-forming bone. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995;95:866-75. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199504001-00016
  33. Johansson B, Grepe A, Wannfors K, Aberg P. CT-scan in assessing volumes of bone grafts to the heavily resorbed maxilla. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1998;26 Suppl 1:85.
  34. Jensen OT, Shulman LB, Block MS, Iacono VJ. Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13 Suppl:11-45.
  35. Block MS, Kent JN, Kallukaran FU, Thunthy K, Weinberg R. Bone maintenance 5 to 10 years after sinus grafting. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;56:706-714. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(98)90801-1
  36. Nystrom E, Kahnberg KE, Albrektsson T. Treatment of the severely resorbed maxillae with bone graft and titanium implants: histologic review of autopsy specimens. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:167-72.
  37. Listrom RD, Symington JM. Osseointegrated dental implants in conjunction with bone grafts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;17:116-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(88)80163-2

Cited by

  1. Histologic evaluation of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound effects on bone regeneration in sinus lift vol.40, pp.6, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2010.40.6.271
  2. Case series of maxillary sinus augmentation with biphasic calcium phosphate: a clinical and radiographic study vol.41, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2011.41.2.98
  3. Histomorphometric study on healing of critical sized defect in rat calvaria using three different bovine grafts vol.9, pp.5, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13770-012-0326-8
  4. Human Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation as a Model for Bone Regeneration Enabling the Application of One-Step Surgical Procedures vol.19, pp.1, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.teb.2012.0404
  5. Comparative Study on the Efficacy of Anorganic Bovine Bone (Bio-Oss) and Nanocrystalline Hydroxyapatite (Ostim) in Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation vol.2014, pp.None, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/967091
  6. Long-term results of new deproteinized bovine bone material in a maxillary sinus graft procedure vol.44, pp.5, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2014.44.5.259
  7. Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Systematic Review vol.41, pp.6, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-14-00167
  8. Subantral Augmentation with a 1/1 Alloplastic and Autologous Material Mixture. Histological Characteristics and Dimensional Stability of the Newly Formed Bone vol.88, pp.1, 2010, https://doi.org/10.15386/cjmed-400
  9. Sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone vs. a bovine‐derived xenograft – a 5‐year retrospective study vol.26, pp.6, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12352
  10. Two Composite Bone Graft Substitutes for Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation : Histological, Histomorphometric, and Radiographic Analyses vol.25, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1097/id.0000000000000378
  11. Clinical and radiological evaluation of implants placed with osteotome sinus lift technique: 19-month follow-up vol.6, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4103/ams.ams_7_16
  12. Effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma as an adjunctive material to bone graft: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials vol.45, pp.8, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2016.02.012
  13. Marginal and apical bone stability after staged sinus floor augmentation using bone condensing implants with variable-thread design: a two-dimensional analysis vol.45, pp.9, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2016.04.012
  14. A radiographic evaluation of graft height changes after maxillary sinus augmentation vol.48, pp.3, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2018.48.3.174
  15. A 2‐year prospective case series on volumetric changes, PROMs, and clinical outcomes following sinus floor elevation using deproteinized bovine bone mineral as filling material vol.21, pp.2, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12730
  16. Tissue Level Changes after Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation with Three Types of Calcium Phosphate Ceramics: A Radiological Study with a 5-Year Follow-Up vol.14, pp.6, 2010, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14061471