Cargando…
A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study
INTRODUCTION: Considering oral rehabilitation with dental implants, many studies have aimed at improving bone regeneration through the use of biomaterials. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing bone neoformation in patients undergoing bilateral maxillary sinus surgery with two bovine biomaterials...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9184224/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35692573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4577148 |
_version_ | 1784724465587847168 |
---|---|
author | Martiniano, Carlos Ricardo de Queiroz Valadas, Lídia Audrey Rocha Lins do Carmo Filho, Jose Ronildo Alves, Ana Paula Negreiros Nunes Leitão Lotif, Mara Assef Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles Dantas, Thereza Cristina Farias Botelho Rodrigues, Luciane Lacerda Franco Rocha Francischone, Carlos Eduardo |
author_facet | Martiniano, Carlos Ricardo de Queiroz Valadas, Lídia Audrey Rocha Lins do Carmo Filho, Jose Ronildo Alves, Ana Paula Negreiros Nunes Leitão Lotif, Mara Assef Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles Dantas, Thereza Cristina Farias Botelho Rodrigues, Luciane Lacerda Franco Rocha Francischone, Carlos Eduardo |
author_sort | Martiniano, Carlos Ricardo de Queiroz |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Considering oral rehabilitation with dental implants, many studies have aimed at improving bone regeneration through the use of biomaterials. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing bone neoformation in patients undergoing bilateral maxillary sinus surgery with two bovine biomaterials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a randomized, blinded, clinical crossover, and divided mouth study. Ten participants with an indication of maxillary sinus enlargement were selected and underwent surgical treatment with Bio-Oss® graft biomaterial (graft 1) on one side and Lumina-Porous® graft biomaterial (graft 2) on the other. The samples were collected after nine months and fixed and then decalcified in 10% ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) solution for 30 days to process and make histological slides. Connective and bone tissue were further analyzed to identify the amount of newly formed bone. RESULTS: The graft 1 group had a greater formation of vital mineralized tissue when compared to the graft 2 group (p = 0.01). For nonvital mineralized tissue and amount of connective tissue, there was no statistical difference (p = 0.21 and p = 0.09, respectively). The medullary spaces were larger in the graft 2 group. The group treated with graft 1 presented a higher percentage of osteoclasts and viable osteocytes compared to the graft 2 group (p = 0.014 and p = 0.027, respectively). CONCLUSION: Every day, new alternative biomaterials are offered as an option in oral rehabilitation. In this study, both treatments induced bone neoformation after 9 months; however, the group treated with Bio-Oss® showed a higher percentage of vital mineralized bone tissue. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9184224 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91842242022-06-10 A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study Martiniano, Carlos Ricardo de Queiroz Valadas, Lídia Audrey Rocha Lins do Carmo Filho, Jose Ronildo Alves, Ana Paula Negreiros Nunes Leitão Lotif, Mara Assef Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles Dantas, Thereza Cristina Farias Botelho Rodrigues, Luciane Lacerda Franco Rocha Francischone, Carlos Eduardo Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Research Article INTRODUCTION: Considering oral rehabilitation with dental implants, many studies have aimed at improving bone regeneration through the use of biomaterials. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing bone neoformation in patients undergoing bilateral maxillary sinus surgery with two bovine biomaterials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a randomized, blinded, clinical crossover, and divided mouth study. Ten participants with an indication of maxillary sinus enlargement were selected and underwent surgical treatment with Bio-Oss® graft biomaterial (graft 1) on one side and Lumina-Porous® graft biomaterial (graft 2) on the other. The samples were collected after nine months and fixed and then decalcified in 10% ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) solution for 30 days to process and make histological slides. Connective and bone tissue were further analyzed to identify the amount of newly formed bone. RESULTS: The graft 1 group had a greater formation of vital mineralized tissue when compared to the graft 2 group (p = 0.01). For nonvital mineralized tissue and amount of connective tissue, there was no statistical difference (p = 0.21 and p = 0.09, respectively). The medullary spaces were larger in the graft 2 group. The group treated with graft 1 presented a higher percentage of osteoclasts and viable osteocytes compared to the graft 2 group (p = 0.014 and p = 0.027, respectively). CONCLUSION: Every day, new alternative biomaterials are offered as an option in oral rehabilitation. In this study, both treatments induced bone neoformation after 9 months; however, the group treated with Bio-Oss® showed a higher percentage of vital mineralized bone tissue. Hindawi 2022-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9184224/ /pubmed/35692573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4577148 Text en Copyright © 2022 Carlos Ricardo de Queiroz Martiniano et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Martiniano, Carlos Ricardo de Queiroz Valadas, Lídia Audrey Rocha Lins do Carmo Filho, Jose Ronildo Alves, Ana Paula Negreiros Nunes Leitão Lotif, Mara Assef Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles Dantas, Thereza Cristina Farias Botelho Rodrigues, Luciane Lacerda Franco Rocha Francischone, Carlos Eduardo A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study |
title | A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study |
title_full | A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study |
title_fullStr | A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study |
title_short | A Comparative Histomorphometric Analysis of Two Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation: A Randomized Clinical, Crossover, and Split-Mouth Study |
title_sort | comparative histomorphometric analysis of two biomaterials for maxillary sinus augmentation: a randomized clinical, crossover, and split-mouth study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9184224/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35692573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4577148 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT martinianocarlosricardodequeiroz acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT valadaslidiaaudreyrocha acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT linsdocarmofilhojoseronildo acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT alvesanapaulanegreirosnunes acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT leitaolotifmaraassef acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT sottomaiorbrunosalles acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT dantastherezacristinafariasbotelho acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT rodrigueslucianelacerdafrancorocha acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT francischonecarloseduardo acomparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT martinianocarlosricardodequeiroz comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT valadaslidiaaudreyrocha comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT linsdocarmofilhojoseronildo comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT alvesanapaulanegreirosnunes comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT leitaolotifmaraassef comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT sottomaiorbrunosalles comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT dantastherezacristinafariasbotelho comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT rodrigueslucianelacerdafrancorocha comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy AT francischonecarloseduardo comparativehistomorphometricanalysisoftwobiomaterialsformaxillarysinusaugmentationarandomizedclinicalcrossoverandsplitmouthstudy |