Int Poster J Dent Oral Med 20 (2018), OMD/PDA 15. Jan. 2019
Int Poster J Dent Oral Med 20 (2018), OMD/PDA (15.01.2019)
Supplement, Poster 2028, Language: English
Comparison of Two Types of Grafts at Maxillary Sinus Elevation: RCT
Correia, Francisco / Gouveia, Sonia / Pozza, Daniel Humberto / Felino, Antonio Campos / Faria-Almeida, Ricardo
Introduction: With limited bone availability in the posterior maxilla, we can regenerate with lateral osteotomy surgery of the maxillary sinus. Main: Histological, histomorphometric and radiological comparison between autograft and xenograft (Osteobiol Mp3®) on maxillary sinus lateral osteotomy.
Materials and methods: Split mouth randomized controlled trial,12 patients sample, 6 months of follow-up. Pre-CT scan was performed to assess the initial bone height, plan simultaneous bilateral sinus lift surgery, and intraoral autograft harvesting. After six months, a CT was performed to reassess the bone volume, plan the implants placement and collect a bone sample.
Results: Histologically wera observed, several stages of remodeling, without inflammation/infection. Histologically, the mean percentage of bone/connective tissue was 57.3%/42.7% vs. 56.0%/44.0% (auto vs xeno, p = 0.380). At patient's scale analysis, there were no significant differences in the performance of the material (p = 0.376). A signifcant effect of the patient (p <0.029) and the patient*material interaction (p <0.001) indicated that the performance of the material depends on the patient. Radiologically, a bone gain of 7.8 ± 2.4 mm vs. 8.7 ± 2.2 mm (auto vs. xeno, p <0.05) was observed, with no significant differences in material performance over time (p =0.26).
Discussion: Autograft is the gold standard, although presents disadvantages that justify the search for biomaterials. Results indicate values of bone/connective tissue, bone height gain and clinical complications similar to those in the literature.
Conclusions: Both grafts present similar results in the studied variables. Clinical Implications: Xenograft is a valid clinical alternative with less morbidity versus autograft. Indication of sources of funding: The regeneration materials are supplied by Tecnoss® (Osteo-biol mp3® and Evolution® membranes). This work was partially funded by the FCT, Foundation for Science and Technology, through projects UID / CEC / 00127/2013 (IEETA / UA, www.ieeta.pt) and UID / MAT / 04106/2013 (CIDMA / http://cidma.mat.ua.pt/). S. Gouveia thanks FCT for postdoctoral funding (ref. BPD / 87037/2012).
Keywords: Bone grafting, sinus augmentation, sinus floor augmentation, bone substitutes, bone regeneration, split mouth randomized clinical trial
27th Annual Meeting of the Portuguese Dental Association 2018 (OMD)
08.-10. November 2018
Exponor, Porto, Portugal