We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone vs. a bovine-derived xenograft - a 5-year retrospective study.
Clinical Oral Implants Research 2015 June
OBJECTIVES: The long-term outcome after sinus augmentation with autogenous bone or a bovine xenograft (Bio-Oss(®)) was assessed in 47 patients. Inclusion criterion was a vertical dimension of the maxilla of <4 mm. After a functional loading period of 60 months, implant survival and reduction in the augmentation height were compared between the two groups evaluated.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sinus augmentation was performed using mandibular bone grafts or Bio-Oss(®). In the autogenous bone group, 70 implants were placed in 23 patients, while in the Bio-Oss(®) group, 24 patients received 98 implants. Fisher's exact test and equivalence testing were used to compare implant survival rates.
RESULTS: The overall survival rate of the implants was 95.8% 5 years after implant insertion. In the autogenous bone group, the implants had a survival rate of 97.1%, while in the Bio-Oss(®) group, 94.9% of the implants survived. The difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05); both treatments are equivalent (confidence interval 90%) for the equivalence interval [-0.1; 0.1]. 43.5% of the cases showed no reduction in the augmentation height 5 years after implant insertion, when augmentation was performed with autogenous bone, while in the Bio-Oss(®) group, no resorption was found in 50% of the augmented areas. Up to 25% reduction in augmentation height was found in 47.8% in the autogenous and in 45.8% in the Bio-Oss(®) group. In 8.7% of all cases in the autogenous bone group and in 4.2 % in the Bio-Oss(®) group, up to 50% of the augmented height was resorbed.
CONCLUSION: After a 5 years evaluation period, Bio-Oss(®) as material for the indication maxillary sinus augmentation shows to be equivalent to autogenous bone grafting.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sinus augmentation was performed using mandibular bone grafts or Bio-Oss(®). In the autogenous bone group, 70 implants were placed in 23 patients, while in the Bio-Oss(®) group, 24 patients received 98 implants. Fisher's exact test and equivalence testing were used to compare implant survival rates.
RESULTS: The overall survival rate of the implants was 95.8% 5 years after implant insertion. In the autogenous bone group, the implants had a survival rate of 97.1%, while in the Bio-Oss(®) group, 94.9% of the implants survived. The difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05); both treatments are equivalent (confidence interval 90%) for the equivalence interval [-0.1; 0.1]. 43.5% of the cases showed no reduction in the augmentation height 5 years after implant insertion, when augmentation was performed with autogenous bone, while in the Bio-Oss(®) group, no resorption was found in 50% of the augmented areas. Up to 25% reduction in augmentation height was found in 47.8% in the autogenous and in 45.8% in the Bio-Oss(®) group. In 8.7% of all cases in the autogenous bone group and in 4.2 % in the Bio-Oss(®) group, up to 50% of the augmented height was resorbed.
CONCLUSION: After a 5 years evaluation period, Bio-Oss(®) as material for the indication maxillary sinus augmentation shows to be equivalent to autogenous bone grafting.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app