our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.
Your Quintessence Publishing House
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 34 (2019), No. 1 21. Mar. 2019
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 34 (2019), No. 1 (21.03.2019)
Page 233-242, doi:10.11607/jomi.7116, PubMed:30521656
A Comparative Study with Biphasic Calcium Phosphate and Deproteinized Bovine Bone in Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Oh, Ji-Su / Seo, Yo-Seob / Lee, Gyeong-Je / You, Jae-Seek / Kim, Su-Gwan
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the new graft material biphasic calcium phosphate, composed of 60% hydroxyapatite and 40% β-tricalcium phosphate, and deproteinized bovine bone mineral, which is established as a predictable graft material for maxillary sinus augmentation.
Materials and Methods: Maxillary sinus augmentation was performed with different bone materials. Bone biopsies were performed on tissue harvested from the future implant bed using a trephine bur at 6 months after maxillary sinus augmentation. Resonance frequency analysis was performed immediately and at 6 months after the implant placement. Microcomputed tomography and histomorphometric analysis were performed in all patients.
Results: Fifty-six patients (60 sinuses) were included in the study. At 6 months postoperative, 31 biopsies were performed on tissues harvested from the calcium phosphate, and 29 biopsies on tissues from the bovine bone grafts. There were no implant failures during the 21-month mean follow-up period. The overall implant stability quotient values were higher than 60, and gradually increased for 6 months. Higher new bone volume fraction and new bone surface density were observed in the calcium phosphate group compared with the bovine bone group. In contrast, residual bone graft volume in the bovine bone group was higher than that in the calcium phosphate group. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences between groups in the microcomputed tomography and histomorphometric parameters.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, both graft materials demonstrated similar biocompatibility and osteoconductivity in the maxillary sinus augmentation.
Keywords: bone grafting, bone regeneration, bone substitutes, clinical trial, dental implants