The Efficacy of the Graft Materials after Sinus Elevation: Retrospective Comparative Study Using Panoramic Radiography.
- Author:
Tae Min JEONG
1
;
Jeong Keun LEE
Author Information
1. Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine, Korea. arcady@ajou.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Efficacy;
Sinus floor augmentation;
Bone substitutes;
Comparative study;
Panoramic radiography
- MeSH:
Allografts;
Bone Substitutes;
Dentistry;
Humans;
Maxillary Sinus;
Radiography, Panoramic*;
Retrospective Studies*;
Sinus Floor Augmentation;
Surgery, Oral;
Tooth;
Transplants*
- From:Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
2014;36(4):146-153
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study compares and evaluates the efficacy of graft materials after maxillary sinus bone grafts with autogenous tooth bone graft material (AutoBT), demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (DFDBA) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM). METHODS: The study involved 30 sinuses in 26 patients who visited the Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry in Ajou University Hospital and received either AutoBT, DFDBA or DBBM with sinus elevation using the lateral window technique. Sinus graft height was measured before, immediately after, and six months after bone graft with panoramic radiography and the height changes of the sinus floor was compared according to the graft materials. RESULTS: After six months, the decrease ratio of graft heights were 13.57% for AutoBT group, 14.30% for DFDBA group, and 11.92% for DBBM group. There was no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: The new maxillary sinus floor formed by the upper border of bone graft material, can repneumatize after the maxillary sinus elevation. Thus, long-term stability of sinus graft height represents an important factor for implant success. We found that the three graft materials for sinus elevation do not differ significantly and all three graft materials showed excellent resistance to maxillary sinus repneumatization. However, due to the special circumstances of the maxillary sinus and small sample, the actual difference between the three graft materials may not have been detectable. Therefore further study needs to be conducted for more reliable study results.
