We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants



Forgotten password?


Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30 (2015), No. 1     21. Jan. 2015
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30 (2015), No. 1  (21.01.2015)

Page 125-132, doi:10.11607/jomi.3681, PubMed:25153004

Microarchitectural Pattern of Pristine Maxillary Bone
Monje, Alberto / González-García, Raúl / Monje, Florencio / Chan, Hsun-Liang / Galindo-Moreno, Pablo / Suarez, Fernando / Wang, Hom-Lay
Purpose: There is limited evidence available on the influence of location on bone density in the maxilla. Therefore, this study was aimed at comparing the microarchitecture of bone harvested from different nonatrophic maxillary locations.
Materials and Methods: A total of 37 partially edentulous subjects (aged 48.15 ± 15.85 years) were included in the study. A bone core biopsy specimen was obtained from one site per patient at the planned implant surgery location. Thirty-four specimens were used for microcomputed tomography (micro-CT) analysis. Mann-Whitney U tests (independent samples) were performed to determine whether the distributions of the six bone-related parameters showed significant differences between sexes and site locations. Study sites were categorized as either anterior (incisors and canines) or posterior (premolars and molars). The possible associations among variables (bone volume fraction [BV/TV], age, and five bone-related parameters) were examined using the Spearman rank correlation test.
Results: The mean BV/TV values showed no significant difference between the maxillary anterior (46.93 ± 26.2) and posterior (51.90 ± 28.42) locations. Statistically significant positive correlations were identified between BV/TV and trabecular thickness (Tb.Th) (r = 0.6, P < .001) and between BV/TV and trabecular number (Tb.N) (r = 0.49, P = .006). Statistically significant negative correlations were found between BV/TV and trabecular spacing (Tb.Sp) (r = -0.65, P < .001), between BV/TV and trabecular pattern factor (Tb.Pf) (r = -0.7, P < .001), and between BV/TV and the structural model index (SMI) (r = -0.68, P < .001). However, no correlations between BV/TV and age or sex were found.
Conclusion: Bone density was independent of the anatomical location, assessed by micro-CT in the pristine nonatrophic maxillary bone. Studies with a larger sample size and different population should be conducted to validate the findings of the current project.

Keywords: alveolar ridge augmentation, bone, dental implant, grafting, maxillary ridge augmentation