Clinical and radiographic outcomes of delayed implant placements after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with different grafting materials

( views:251, downloads:0 )
Author:
ZHANG Xiao(The First Outpatient Dental Clinic, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology,Beijing 100034, China)
SUN Feng(The First Outpatient Dental Clinic, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology,Beijing 100034, China)
ZHANG Feng(The First Outpatient Dental Clinic, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology,Beijing 100034, China)
ZHANG Zhi-yong(The First Outpatient Dental Clinic, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology,Beijing 100034, China)
Journal Title:
Chinese Journal of Stomatology
Issue:
Volume 47, Issue 10, 2012
DOI:
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2012.10.003
Key Word:
Dental implantation; Maxillary sinus floor augmentation; Resorption of graft

Abstract: Objective To evaluate the long-term clinical outcome of delayed implant placements after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autologous bone or Bio-Oss grafting.Methods Eighteen patients underwent maxillary sinus floor augmentation and delayed implant placements from January,2002 to December,2008. Bone grafting and sinus floor augmentation were performed in 21 sides of maxilla and 46 implants were placed 6-8 months later.Residual bone height was less than 4 mm.The cases were divided to 2 groups and different materials (autologous bone + Bio-Oss and Bio-Oss alone ) were grafted relatively.The bone resorption was assessed by panoramic X-ray and the stability of the implant was reviewed postoperatively.Results The average follow-up time was 54 months.Only one implant was lost and the implant survival rate was 98%.X-ray showed that the bone resorption was observed in both groups.The absorption ratio of autologous bone + Bio-Oss group was 18.65% and that of the Bio-oss group was 1.93%.The difference was significantly different.Conclusions The result of maxillary sinus floor augmentation with bone grafting was predictable.More bone absorption occurred in the Bio-Oss than in autologous bone + Bio-Oss.

  • [1]Clavero J,Lundgren S.Ramus or chin grafts for maxillary sinus inlay and local onlay augmentation:comparison of donor site morbidity and complications.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res,2003,5(3):154-160.
  • [2]Johansson B,Grepe A,Wannfors K,et al.A clinical study of changes in the volume of bone grafts in the atrophic maxilla.Dentomaxillofac Radio1,2001,30(3):157-161.
  • [3]Buser D,Weber HP,Lang NP. Tissue integration of nonsubmerged implants.1-year results of a prospective study with 100 ITI hollow-cylinder and hollow-screw implants.Clin Oral Implants Res,1990,1 (1):33-40.
  • [4]Zijderveld SA, Schulten EA, Aartman IH, et al.Long-term changes in graft height after maxillary sinus floor elevation with different grafting materials: radiographic evaluation with a minimum follow-up of 4.5 years.Clin Oral Implants Res,2009,20(7):691-700.
  • [5]Jensen SS, Terheyden H.Bone augmentation procedures in localized defects in the alveolar ridge: clinical results with different bone grafts and bone-substitute materials.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants,2009,24 Suppl:218-236.
  • [6]Bornstein MM,Chappuis V,von Arx T,et al.Performance of dental implants after staged sinus floor elevation procedures:5-year results of a prospective study in partially edentulous patients.Clin Oral Implants Res,2008,19(10):1034-1043.
  • [7]Del Fabbro M,Rosano G,Taschieri S.Implant survival rates after maxillary sinus augmentation.Eur J Oral Sci,2008,116 (6):497-506.
  • [8]Rickert D,Slater JJ,Meijer HJ,et al.Maxillary sinus lift with solely.autogenous bone compared to a combination of autogenous bone and growth factors or (solely) bone substitutes.A systematic review.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg,2012,41 (2):160-167.
  • [9]Nkenke E,Stelzle F.Clinical outcomes of sinus floor augmentation for implant placement using autogenous bone or bone substitutes:a systematic review.Clin Oral Implants Res,2009,20 Suppl 4:124-133.
  • [10]Hallman M,Sennerby L,Zetterqvist L,et al.A 3-year prospective follow-up study of implant-supported fixed prostheses in patients subjected to maxillary sinus floor augmentation with a 80∶20 mixture of deproteinized bovine bone and autogenous bone Clinical,radiographic and resonance frequency analysis.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg,2005,34 (3):273-280.
  • [11]Pjetursson BE,Tan WC,Zwahlen M,et al.A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation.J Clin Periodonto1,2008,35 (8 Suppl):216-240.
  • [12]Jensen T,Schou S,Stavropoulos A,et al.Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with Bio-Oss or Bio-Oss mixed with autogenous bone as graft in animals:a systematic review.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg,2012,41 (1):114-120.
  • [13]Kim YK,Yun PY,Kim SG,et al.Evaluation of sinus bone resorption and marginal bone loss after sinus bone grafting and implant placement.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod,2009,107 (2):e21-28.
WanfangData CO.,Ltd All Rights Reserved
About WanfangData | Contact US
Healthcare Department, Fuxing Road NO.15, Haidian District Beijing, 100038 P.R.China
Tel:+86-010-58882616 Fax:+86-010-58882615 Email:yiyao@wanfangdata.com.cn