Histomorphometric comparison of maxillary pristine bone and composite bone graft biopsies obtained after sinus augmentation
Article first published online: 21 OCT 2009
© 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Volume 21, Issue 1, pages 122–128, January 2010
How to Cite
Galindo-Moreno, P., Moreno-Riestra, I., Ávila, G., Fernández-Barbero, J. E., Mesa, F., Aguilar, M., Wang, H.-L. and O'Valle, F. (2010), Histomorphometric comparison of maxillary pristine bone and composite bone graft biopsies obtained after sinus augmentation. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 21: 122–128. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01814.x
- Issue published online: 15 DEC 2009
- Article first published online: 21 OCT 2009
- Date: Accepted 22 June 2009
- anorganic bovine bone;
- autologous bone;
- bone remodeling;
- dental implants;
- sinus grafting
Introduction: Sinus grafting is a technique oriented to facilitate implant placement in posterior atrophic maxillae. Several modifications of the original technique and a wide variety of materials have been proposed; most of them associated with implant survival rates. However, the quality of the bone obtained after the application of certain grafting materials has not been fully elucidated yet. The aims of this multicenter study were to analyse histomorphometrical samples obtained 6 months after sinus grafting using a composite graft consisting of anorganic bovine bone (ABB)+ autologous bone (AB), and to compare these samples with maxillary pristine bone biopsies.
Material and methods: Ninety maxillary sinus augmentations were performed for delayed implant placement (N=90) in 45 consecutive patients (test group). Bone cores were harvested 6 months after grafting for histomorphometric and ultrastructural study. Control pristine bone biopsies were taken from the posterior maxilla of 10 patients (control). Bone radiographic changes were assessed up to 24 months after implant loading.
Results: The total mean values after analysis of test cores revealed a proportion of 46.08±16.6% of vital bone, 42.27±15.1% of non-mineralized connective tissue, and 37.02±25.1% of the remaining ABB particles. Significant bone remodeling activities were noticed in sinus grafting samples when compared with pristine bone. A statistically significant difference was observed in the number of osteoid lines between two groups, with higher values in the test one (15.1±11.48% vs. 2.5±2.2%, P=0.0005). Ultrastructural study showed that vital trabecular bone was in intimal contact with ABB particles. Radiographic analysis revealed that the higher the proportion of remaining ABB, the lower the total vertical resorption of the graft.
Conclusion: Sinus grafting constitutes an excellent model for the study of de novo bone formation patterns and graft consolidation, when a combination of different bone substitutes is applied. The combination of ABB+AB yields highly satisfactory outcomes from both a clinical and a histologic perspective.
To cite this article: Galindo-Moreno P, Moreno-Riestra I, Ávila G, Fernández-Barbero JE, Mesa F, Aguilar M, Wang H-L, O'Valle F. Histomorphometric comparison of maxillary pristine bone and composite bone graft biopsies obtained after sinus augmentation. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 21, 2009; 122–128.