Cargando…

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation

The objective of this study was to compare marginal bone loss, surgical and clinical complications, and dental implant survival rate in bilateral maxillary sinus augmented by autologous or porcine xenograft. A randomized controlled clinical trial using split-mouth design enrolled 12 consent adult pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Correia, Francisco, Gouveia, Sónia Alexandre, Pozza, Daniel Humberto, Felino, António Campos, Faria-Almeida, Ricardo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9919245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36770223
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16031220
_version_ 1784886776198856704
author Correia, Francisco
Gouveia, Sónia Alexandre
Pozza, Daniel Humberto
Felino, António Campos
Faria-Almeida, Ricardo
author_facet Correia, Francisco
Gouveia, Sónia Alexandre
Pozza, Daniel Humberto
Felino, António Campos
Faria-Almeida, Ricardo
author_sort Correia, Francisco
collection PubMed
description The objective of this study was to compare marginal bone loss, surgical and clinical complications, and dental implant survival rate in bilateral maxillary sinus augmented by autologous or porcine xenograft. A randomized controlled clinical trial using split-mouth design enrolled 12 consent adult patients (59.7 ± 8.7 years), who received bilateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation for oral rehabilitation with implant-supported prosthesis. Each patient received both the autologous bone from the mandible (control) or porcine xenograft (test) during the random bilateral sinus lift surgery. A total of 39 dental implants were placed in the posterior maxilla of the 12 patients after 6 months, being rehabilitated after the respective osseointegration period. Both graft materials demonstrated a high implant survival rate at 12 months: 95% for the xenograft side, only 1 implant without osseointegration, and 100% for the autologous side. Radiographic bone loss was low and similar for both groups: control group with a mean of 0.063 ± 0.126, and test group with a mean of 0.092 ± 0.163. No major surgical-related complications have occurred. Only one patient had several prosthetic complications due to fractures of prosthetic components. The maxillary sinus augmentation procedure, both with autologous bone and porcine xenograft materials, is an excellent clinical option procedure for the prosthetic rehabilitation of atrophic maxillae, with low marginal bone loss after one year follow-up, few clinical complications, and a high implant survival rate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9919245
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99192452023-02-12 A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation Correia, Francisco Gouveia, Sónia Alexandre Pozza, Daniel Humberto Felino, António Campos Faria-Almeida, Ricardo Materials (Basel) Article The objective of this study was to compare marginal bone loss, surgical and clinical complications, and dental implant survival rate in bilateral maxillary sinus augmented by autologous or porcine xenograft. A randomized controlled clinical trial using split-mouth design enrolled 12 consent adult patients (59.7 ± 8.7 years), who received bilateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation for oral rehabilitation with implant-supported prosthesis. Each patient received both the autologous bone from the mandible (control) or porcine xenograft (test) during the random bilateral sinus lift surgery. A total of 39 dental implants were placed in the posterior maxilla of the 12 patients after 6 months, being rehabilitated after the respective osseointegration period. Both graft materials demonstrated a high implant survival rate at 12 months: 95% for the xenograft side, only 1 implant without osseointegration, and 100% for the autologous side. Radiographic bone loss was low and similar for both groups: control group with a mean of 0.063 ± 0.126, and test group with a mean of 0.092 ± 0.163. No major surgical-related complications have occurred. Only one patient had several prosthetic complications due to fractures of prosthetic components. The maxillary sinus augmentation procedure, both with autologous bone and porcine xenograft materials, is an excellent clinical option procedure for the prosthetic rehabilitation of atrophic maxillae, with low marginal bone loss after one year follow-up, few clinical complications, and a high implant survival rate. MDPI 2023-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9919245/ /pubmed/36770223 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16031220 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Correia, Francisco
Gouveia, Sónia Alexandre
Pozza, Daniel Humberto
Felino, António Campos
Faria-Almeida, Ricardo
A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation
title A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation
title_full A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation
title_fullStr A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation
title_full_unstemmed A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation
title_short A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Implants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials Used for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation
title_sort randomized clinical trial comparing implants placed in two different biomaterials used for maxillary sinus augmentation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9919245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36770223
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16031220
work_keys_str_mv AT correiafrancisco arandomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT gouveiasoniaalexandre arandomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT pozzadanielhumberto arandomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT felinoantoniocampos arandomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT fariaalmeidaricardo arandomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT correiafrancisco randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT gouveiasoniaalexandre randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT pozzadanielhumberto randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT felinoantoniocampos randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation
AT fariaalmeidaricardo randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingimplantsplacedintwodifferentbiomaterialsusedformaxillarysinusaugmentation