scholarly journals Histological and Histomorphometric Analyses after Sinus Floor Augmentation with Different Grafting Materials

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luís Otávio Palhari
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Bone Matrix ◽  
Microscopic Analysis ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Osseointegrated Implants ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Grafting Materials

Homogeneous grafts from a bone bank, heterogeneous grafts and allow plastic grafts have already been studied and used for maxillary sinus elevation in order to reconstruct the bone for placement of dental implants. The present work aims to histologically assess bone neoformation from autogenous and heterogeneous (or xenogenous) bone grafts, in maxillary sinus lift surgery, an invasive technique. Six patients (total of 10 elevated maxillary sinuses) participated in the study with an alveolar bone remnant in the posterior region of the maxilla, less than 5mm, classification by Misch SA-4, evidenced through panoramic radiography. After a waiting period of tissue repair of 8 months, samples were collected and microscopic analysis was performed in 3 groups: autogenous group, Bio-Oss® group and Endobon® group. It was observed that the autogenous group has a statistically higher amount of bone matrix when compared to the other 2 groups. These did not differ from each other. The three types of grafts used promoted the expected new bone formation. Thus, one can choose any of the grafts evaluated to enable the installation of Osseointegrated implants and prosthetic rehabilitation in patients with the atrophic posterior maxilla.

Surgical Ciliated Cyst Following Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation: A Case Report

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 360-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinsuke Yamamoto ◽  
Keigo Maeda ◽  
Izumi Kouchi ◽  
Yuzo Hirai ◽  
Naoki Taniike ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Maxillary Sinusitis ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Japanese Woman ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Ciliated Cyst

Maxillary sinus floor augmentation is considered to play a critical role in dental implant treatment. Although many complications, such as maxillary sinusitis and infection, are well known, few reports are available on the risk of surgical ciliated cyst following the procedure. Here, we report a case of surgical ciliated cyst following maxillary sinus floor augmentation. A 55-year-old Japanese woman was referred to our hospital because of alveolar bone atrophy in the bilateral maxilla. We performed bilateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation by the lateral window technique without covering the window. The Schneiderian membrane did not perforate during the operation. She returned to our hospital after 9 years due to swelling of the left buccal region. Computerized tomography revealed a well-defined radiolucent area with radiodense border intraosseously localized in the left maxilla. We performed enucleation of the cyst with the patient under general anesthesia. Histological examination of the specimen showed a surgical ciliated cyst. In conclusion, the course of this patient has 2 important implications. First, the sinus membrane entrapped in the grafted bone without visible perforation and or tearing can develop into a surgical ciliated cyst. Second, there is a possibility that covering the lateral window tightly might prevent the development of a surgical ciliated cyst.

A Sinus Floor Reaugmentation Technique Around an Apically Exposed Implant Into the Maxillary Sinus

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-217
Author(s):  
Daisuke Ueno ◽  
Noriko Banba ◽  
Akira Hasuike ◽  
Kazuhiko Ueda ◽  
Toshiro Kodama
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Treatment Option ◽  
Prolonged Treatment ◽  
Sinus Cavity ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Recovery Approach

Sinus floor augmentation (SFA) is the most predictable treatment option in the atrophic posterior maxilla. However, exposure of the apical implant body into the maxillary sinus cavity is an occasionally observed phenomenon after SFA. Although most penetrating dental implants remain completely asymptomatic, they may induce recurrent rhinosinusitis or implant loss. Removal of the implant should be considered if there is significant implant exposure that results in prolonged treatment and increased costs. This case report demonstrates a recovery approach using sinus floor reaugmentation without implant removal in a patient with an apically exposed implant into the maxillary sinus cavity.

scholarly journals Osteotome-Mediated Sinus Lift without Grafting Material: A Review of Literature and a Technique Proposal

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvio Taschieri ◽  
Stefano Corbella ◽  
Massimo Saita ◽  
Igor Tsesis ◽  
Massimo Del Fabbro
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Bone Volume ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Sinus Augmentation ◽  
Lifting Technique ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Augmentation ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Grafting Materials

Implant rehabilitation of the edentulous posterior maxilla may be a challenging procedure in the presence of insufficient bone volume for implant placement. Maxillary sinus augmentation with or without using grafting materials aims to provide adequate bone volume. The aim of the present study was to systematically review the existing literature on transalveolar maxillary sinus augmentation without grafting materials and to propose and describe an osteotome-mediated approach in postextraction sites in combination with platelet derivative. The systematic review showed that high implant survival rate (more than 96% after 5 years) can be achieved even without grafting the site, with a low rate of complications. Available alveolar bone height before surgery was not correlated to survival rate. In the described case report, three implants were placed in posterior maxilla after extraction of two teeth. An osteotome-mediated sinus lifting technique was performed with the use of platelet derivative (PRGF); a synthetic bone substitute was used to fill the gaps between implant and socket walls. No complications occurred, and implants were successfully in site after 1 year from prosthetic loading. The presented technique might represent a viable alternative for the treatment of edentulous posterior maxilla with atrophy of the alveolar bone though it needs to be validated by studies with a large sample size.

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.

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

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Dibo Cruz ◽  
Guilherme Alvares Peixoto ◽  
Marcelo Freitas Aguiar ◽  
Gabriela Alessandra Cruz Galhardo Camargo ◽  
Nicolas Homs
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Graft Material ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Computed Tomography Images ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation

Abstract This study aimed to assess the performance of surgeons in determining the amount of graft material required for maxillary sinus floor augmentation in a preoperative analysis using cone-beam computed tomography images. A convenience sample of 10 retrospective CBCT exams (i-CAT®) was selected. Scans of the posterior maxilla area with an absence of at least one tooth and residual alveolar bone with an up to 5 mm height were used. Templates (n=20) contained images of representative cross-sections in multiplanar view. Ten expert surgeons voluntarily participated as appraisers of the templates for grafting surgical planning of a 10 mm long implant. Appraisers could choose a better amount of graft material using scores: 0) when considered grafting unnecessary, 1) for 0.25 g in graft material, 2) for 0.50 g, 3) for 1.00 g and 4) for 1.50 g or more. Reliability of the response pattern was analyzed using Cronbach’s a. Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney tests were performed to compare scores. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate whether the volume of sinuses (mm3) influenced the choose of scores. In the reliability analysis, all values were low and the score distribution was independent of the volume of the maxillary sinuses (p>0.05), which did not influence choosing the amount of graft material. Surgeons were unreliable to determine the best amount of graft material for the maxillary sinus floor augmentation using only CBCT images. Surgeons require auxiliary diagnostic tools to measure the volume associated to CBCT exams in order to perform better.

scholarly journals A Minimally Invasive Technique for Short Spiral Implant Insertion with Contextual Crestal Sinus Lifting in the Atrophic Maxilla: A Preliminary Report

Healthcare ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
Massimo Corsalini ◽  
Silvia D’Agostino ◽  
Gianfranco Favia ◽  
Marco Dolci ◽  
Angela Tempesta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Atrophic Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Short Spiral ◽  
Heterologous Bone Graft

The most recently reported techniques for the rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla are increasingly less invasive, as they are generally oriented to avoid sinus floor elevation with lateral access. The authors describe a mini-invasive surgical technique for short spiral implant insertion for the prosthetic rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla, which could be considered a combination of several previously described techniques based on the under-preparation of the implant site to improve fixture primary stability and crestal approach to the sinus floor elevation without heterologous bone graft. Eighty short spiral implants were inserted in the molar area of the maxilla in patients with 4.5–6 mm of alveolar bone, measured on pre-operative computed tomography. The surgical technique involved careful drilling for the preparation of implant sites at differentiated depths, allowing bone dislocation in the apical direction, traumatic crestal sinus membrane elevation, and insertion of an implant (with spiral morphology) longer than pre-operative measurements. Prostheses were all single crowns. In all cases, a spiral implant 2–4 mm longer than the residual bone was placed. Only two implants were lost due to peri-implantitis but subsequently replaced and followed-up. Bone loss values around the implants after three months (at the re-opening) ranged from 0 to 0.6 mm, (median value: 0.1 mm), while after two years, the same values ranged from 0.4 to 1.3 mm (median value: 0.7 mm). Clinical post-operative complications did not occur. After ten years, no implant has been lost. Overall, the described protocol seems to show good results in terms of predictability and patient compliance.

scholarly journals Histological, radiological and clinical outcomes of sinus floor elevation using lateral approach pre-/post- extraction of the severe periodontally compromised maxillary molars: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhaoguo Yue ◽  
Qi Liu ◽  
Haidong Zhang ◽  
Jingwen Yang ◽  
Yalin Zhan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tooth Extraction ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Sinus Floor

Abstract Background Residual alveolar bone volume is a critical factor for the dental implants’ survival [1]. When the volume of alveolar bone in the posterior maxillary region is less than 4mm, the maxillary sinus floor elevation (MSFE) with lateral approach is an effective way to solve this problem [2]. Traditionally, this standard approach is usually delivered 4 months after the extraction of the tooth. However, the defective dentition due to the extraction would cause impaired masticatory function during the long period of the bone regeneration, especially when molars on both sides are severely periodontal compromised and need to be extracted. So, as periodontists, we start to wonder if we can maintain a compromised tooth so that we perform the sinus floor elevation before the extraction (the modified MSFE) to take fully advantage of residual strength of the teeth. Methods/Design The proposed study is designed as a prospective single-center, split-mouth design, randomized controlled trial. We plan to recruit 10 patients whose molars on both sides are severely periodontal compromised and in need of dental implant treatment in the atrophied posterior maxilla. The two sides of each patients will be divided into two groups randomly using Randomizer for Clinical Trials (Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical Univ. Graz). Test group: sinus floor augmentation before tooth extraction (the modified MSFE); Control group: sinus floor augmentation after tooth extraction (the standard MSFE). Implant survival rates, mucosal conditions around the implants, complications, treatment time and postoperative discomfort (visual analogue scale for intraoperative pain and postoperative pain/discomfort) will be recorded. The volume of the alveolar bone will be measured 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the MSFE surgery by means of CBCT. Histological and histomorphometic analysis will be performed on biopsies retrieved from both side of grafting sites. Discussion The current study will explore the effectiveness of the modified MSFE on minimizing the discomfort period caused by defected dentition. To determine whether the modified MSFE will promote the grafting outcomes, the quality and the quantity of the osteogenesis on the sinus floor will also be compared. Depending on the result of the current study, we will determine all the protocols and details about the modified MSFE, including indications, detailed methods, post-operational complications and managements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document