Krennmair S, Postl L, Schwarze UY, Malek M, Stimmelmayr M, Krennmair G. Clinical, radiographic, and histological/histomorphometric analysis of maxillary sinus grafting with deproteinized porcine or bovine bone mineral: A randomized clinical trial.
Clin Oral Implants Res 2023;
34:1230-1247. [PMID:
37610063 DOI:
10.1111/clr.14164]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/25/2022] [Revised: 07/18/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 08/24/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
The present study aimed to compare histomorphometrically evaluated new bone formation, radiographically measured graft stability, and clinical implant outcome between maxillary sinus grafting with either deproteinized porcine bone mineral (DPBM) or deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Thirty maxillary sinuses were initially included and randomly assigned to the test group (TG; DPBM, n = 15) or control group (CG; DBBM, n = 15). After a healing period (6 months), axially retrieved bone biopsies of the molar region were used for histological/histomorphometric analysis of new bone formations. Additionally, radiographically measured graft stability and clinical implant outcome were assessed.
RESULTS
Twenty-three sinus sites with 10 sinuses of the TG and 13 of the CG were ultimately available for data and statistical analysis. In the TG, a slightly, but yet significantly (p = .040) higher proportion of new bone formation (TG: 27.7 ± 5.6% vs. CG: 22.9 ± 5.1%) and a lesser (p = .019) amount of connective (non-mineralized) tissue (TG: 47.5 ± 9.5% vs. CG: 56.1 ± 9.5%) was found than in the CG. However, both xenografts showed comparable (n.s.) residual bone graft (TG: 23.7 ± 7.2% vs. CG: 21.1 ± 9.85.6%), bone-to-graft contacts (TG: 26.2 ± 9.8% vs. CG: 30.8 ± 13.8%), similar graft height reduction over time (TG: 12.9 ± 6.7% CG: 12.4 ± 5.8%) and implant survival/success rate (100%). At the 3-year post-loading evaluation, the peri-implant marginal bone loss (TG: 0.52 ± 0.19 mm; CG: 0.48 ± 0.15 mm) and the peri-implant health conditions (TG: 87.5%/CG: 81.2%) did not differ between implants inserted in both xenografts used.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of DPBM or DBBM for maxillary sinus augmentation is associated with comparable bone formation providing stable graft dimension combined with healthy peri-implant conditions.
Collapse