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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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