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
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 34 (2019), No. 4     22. July 2019
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 34 (2019), No. 4  (22.07.2019)

Page 920-926


Volumetric Analysis of Allogeneic and Xenogeneic Bone Substitutes Used in Maxillary Sinus Augmentations Utilizing Cone Beam Computed Tomography: A Prospective Randomized Pilot Study
Salem, Daliah / Alshihri, Abdulmonem / Arguello, Emilio / Jung, Ronald E. / Mohmed, Hamed A. / Friedland, Bernard
Purpose: The purpose of this prospective, randomized, clinical pilot study was to compare the threedimensional changes of grafted maxillary sinuses when deproteinized bovine bone (DBB) or cortical mineralized allogeneic bone (MAB) was used.
Materials and Methods: Seventeen patients were randomly assigned to receive either DBB or MAB for lateral-approach maxillary sinus augmentation. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were performed preoperatively (T0), immediately after (T1), and at approximately 6 months postoperatively (T2). Three-dimensional analysis of the radiographic volumetric changes was performed for DBB and MAB by measuring the difference in unoccupied sinus volumes at T1 and T2.
Results: In the DBB group, a statistically significant increase in unoccupied sinus volume was found at T2 when compared to T1 (P = .001), representing a mean resorption rate of 23.8% ± 15.9%. Similarly in the MAB group, a statistically significant increase in unoccupied sinus volume was found at T2 when compared to T1 (P = .007); the mean resorption rate in the MAB group was 19.5% ± 10.1%. There was no statistically significant difference between the contraction of DBB (23.8%) and MAB (19.5%) (P = .52).
Conclusion: Both DBB and MAB showed sufficient volume stability at T2 (mean: 6.3 ± 1.6 months) postoperatively for 10- to 13-mm-implant placement without the need for additional grafting.

Keywords: bone remodeling, bone substitute, dental implants, maxillary sinus