Does Concentrated Growth Factor Used With Allografts in Maxillary Sinus Lifting Have Adjunctive Benefits?

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-108
Author(s):  
Emine Adalı ◽  
Meltem Ozden Yüce ◽  
Tayfun Günbay ◽  
Sevtap Günbay
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Sinus Lifting

scholarly journals Maxillary Sinus Augmentation Using Ceramic Alloplastic Granules or Paste: An Experimental Study in Rabbits

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Michael Medeiros Costa ◽  
Daniele Botticelli ◽  
Ofer Moses ◽  
Yuki Omori ◽  
Shigeo Fujiwara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Formation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Biological Behavior ◽  
Collagen Membrane ◽  
Alloplastic Material ◽  
New Bone Formation ◽  
Sinus Augmentation ◽  
Beta Tricalcium Phosphate ◽  
Sinus Lifting ◽  
Points Of View

Background: Due to the lack of data comparing the biological behavior of two formulations, granules and paste, of alloplastic graft from microtomographic and histomorphometric points of view, the aim of the present experiment was to compare the histomorphometric and microtomographic healing of two formulations, i.e., granules (MR sites) or paste (MR-inject sites) of an alloplastic graft composed of a combination of beta-tricalcium phosphate and hydroxyapatite used for maxillary sinus lifting. Methods: A sinus lifting procedure was carried out bilaterally in 20 rabbits, and the elevated space was filled with either paste or granules of an alloplastic material. A collagen membrane was placed on the antrostomy and the animals were euthanized after 2 or 10 weeks, 10 animals each group. Microtomographic and histological analyses were performed. Results: Higher proportions of new bone formation were found at the MR, compared to the MR-inject sites both after 2 weeks (2.65 ± 2.89% vs. 0.08 ± 0.12%; p < 0.01) and 10 weeks of healing (34.20 ± 13.86 vs. 23.28 ± 10.35%; p = 0.022). Conclusions: It was concluded that new bone formation was faster in the MR sites, compared to the MR-inject. However, a longer time of healing should be allowed to make final conclusions about the efficiency in bone formation of the paste formulation of the biomaterial used in the present study.

scholarly journals Floating septum technique: easy and safe method maxillary sinus septa in sinus lifting procedure

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Junho Jung ◽  
Bo-Yeon Hwang ◽  
Byung-Soo Kim ◽  
Jung-Woo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Maxillary Sinusitis ◽  
Sinus Lift ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Schneiderian Membrane ◽  
Safe Method ◽  
Membrane Perforation ◽  
Sinus Lifting ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Septa ◽  
Sinus Floor

Abstract Background The presence of septa increases the risk of Schneiderian membrane perforation during sinus lift procedure, and therefore, the chance of graft failure increases. We present a safe method of managing septa and, in particular, overcoming small and palatally located septa. Methods After the elevation of the flap and the creation of a small bony window positioned anterior to the septum, the Schneiderian membrane is lifted carefully. A thin and narrow osteotome is then placed at the indentation created at the base of the septum, and mobilization of the septum is achieved by gentle malleting. The membrane is again carefully lifted up behind the septum. Results There was one small membrane perforation case in all 16 cases, and none of these patients showed postoperative complications such as implant failure, infection, or maxillary sinusitis. Conclusions This technique is useful for overcoming the problem of maxillary sinus septa hindering the sinus floor elevation procedure, leading to fewer complications.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of maxillary sinus lifting with various types of grafting with implants insertion purposes: A review of the literature

2020 ◽  
pp. 31-45
Author(s):  
João de Paula Martins Júnior ◽  
Álvaro Nagib Atallah
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Bone Volume ◽  
Local Inflammatory Response ◽  
Average Percentage ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Sinus Lifting

Context: Edentulous patients under the use of removable prosthesis face important restrictions, including sociocultural ones and, for this reason, the insertion of implants has become frequent in clinical dental practice. However, the success of the method will depend on the sort of different types of bone grafting, quality of donor area and the residual amount of bone left in insertion site. Purpose: the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different types of bone grafts used in maxillary sinus lifting surgeries for implant insertion. Methods: systematic review of randomized clinical trials or quasi-randomized. We used the guidelines of the manual of systematic reviews from Cochrane Collaboration and a sensitive search strategy in three electronic databases has been built. Results: We included six randomized clinical trials from different regions of the world with 135 participants. Bone volume was 3% higher on the grafted site with autogenic bone pure, but not a statistically significant difference DM: 3 (-8.48-14.48), the average percentage between the vital and non-vital bone showed up 0.82% higher on the grafted site with FDBA + PRP. The average percentage of vital tissue was also 15.8% higher on the side where PRP was used. Conclusion: the available evidence is insufficient to recommend a specific type of bone grafting in sinus augmentation (lift) procedures to place a dental implant. There was no statistically significant difference for bone volume, sensory loss, local inflammatory response and loss of implants, among others. For this reason, new randomized controlled trials that evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different types of bone graft for lifting of the maxillary sinus are necessary. Key-words: Maxillary sinus. Grafting, survey, technique, materials.

scholarly journals Clinical and radiological comparison of the effects of concentrated growth factor on bone formation used in closed sinus lifting applications

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (S19) ◽  
pp. 527-527
Author(s):  
UĞur Tekin ◽  
Dilek ÖztÜrk ◽  
BÜlent GÖkÇe ◽  
Pelİn GÜnerİ
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factor ◽  
Bone Formation ◽  
Sinus Lifting

scholarly journals Correlation of Fractal Dimension with Histomorphometry in Maxillary Sinus Lifting Using Autogenous Bone Graft

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael Scaf de Molon ◽  
Wagner Nunes de Paula ◽  
Rubens Spin-Neto ◽  
Mario Henrique Arruda Verzola ◽  
Guilherme Monteiro Tosoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fractal Dimension ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Bone Remodeling ◽  
Volume Fraction ◽  
Autogenous Bone ◽  
Histomorphometric Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sinus Lifting ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 1

The aim of this study was to determine the pattern of bone remodeling after maxillary sinus lifting in humans by means of fractal dimension (FD) and histomorphometric analysis. Therefore, the correlation between FD and the histomorphometric findings was evaluated. Sixteen patients with posterior edentulous maxilla were enrolled in this study. Maxillary sinus lifting was performed using autogenous bone grafted from the mandibular retromolar area. Three direct digital panoramic radiographs were obtained: before surgery (Group 1), immediately postoperatively (Group 2) and after 6 months of healing (Group 3) for FD analysis. Biopsies were taken after 6 months, processed and submitted to histological and histomorphometric analysis. Data were analyzed by Shapiro-Wilk test and ANOVA test followed by a Tukey test (a=0.05). The bone volume fraction of newly trabecular bone (TB) and medullary area (MA) was measured as 62.75%±17.16% and 37.25±17.16%, respectively. Significant difference in FD analysis was measured between Group 1 and Group 3. No significant difference was found in the correlation between FD and histomorphometric analysis for TB and MA (p=0.84). In conclusion, all performed analyses were effective in assessing the bone-remodeling pattern in the maxillary sinus, offering complementary information about healing and predictable outcomes. There were no correlations between FD and histomorphometric analysis.

Radiologic Evaluation of Putty Versus Powder Form of Demineralized Bone Matrix in Sinus Floor Elevation

2012 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cem Üngör
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Demineralized Bone Matrix ◽  
Bone Matrix ◽  
Powder Form ◽  
Panoramic Radiographs ◽  
Sinus Lifting ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation

The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in ossification of the 2 forms of demineralized bone matrix (DBM)—putty and powder—radiographically, using digital densitometry on panoramic radiographs in maxillary sinus floor augmentation procedures. Twelve subjects needing bilateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation for the placement of osseointegrated implants were included in this study. The left and right maxillary sinuses were augmented in the same session in each patient using the 2 preferred forms of DBM—putty and powder—during the same session. One sinus was augmented with DBM putty form and the other sinus was augmented with DBM powder form randomly. Every patient had a total of 4 panoramic radiographs taken, preoperatively and in the first, third, and sixth month postoperatively. The densitometry measurements were taken from each step of the aluminium step-wedge, from both sinuses from different points a total of 3 times, and the average of these measurements was calculated. The amount of mineralization in each graft material in every radiograph was clarified by the appearance of a difference in the equivalent aluminium thickness, and the obtained results were statistically evaluated. The results showed that there were no significant differences between two graft materials statistically. These two graft materials could be good alternatives in sinus lifting procedures because of less morbidity, lower price, and good ossification. The results indicate that 2 different types of DBM achieved good ossification in the sinus lifting procedure, and there is not a considerable distinction in these 2 forms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document