We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Randomized Clinical Trial of Maxillary Sinus Grafting using Deproteinized Porcine and Bovine Bone Mineral.
Clinical Implant Dentistry and related Research 2017 Februrary
BACKGROUND: Deproteinized porcine bone mineral (DPBM) was recently developed and commercially available in maxillary sinus grafting, in which demineralized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) was widely used.
OBJECTIVES: The present randomized controlled clinical trial aimed to compare histological bone quality and radiographic volume stability in maxillary sinuses grafted with DPBM and DBBM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty sinuses in 16 participants were enrolled and randomly allocated to control and test groups using sequentially numbered, sealed envelopes; laterally approached sinus grafting with DBBM and DPBM, respectively. All participants were blinded to the group assignment during the entire experiment. After standardized osteotomy at the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus, the sinus membrane was elevated, and the control or test biomaterial was grafted. Computed tomography (CT) images were taken immediately after surgery, and another CT and trephine biopsy was taken for radiographic and histological analyses after 6 months. The histological bone quality was measured as a primary outcome, and changes in the height and volume of the graft were evaluated in the reconstructed CT images as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS: Fifteen sites (7 and 8 sites for control and test group) in 11 participants were finally included in the per protocol (PP) analysis, and 16 sites (7 and 9 sites, respectively) in 12 participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis; there were four drop-outs and one minor protocol violation. In both statistical analyses, the test groups showed comparable new bone formation and residual biomaterials in histology, and both groups exhibited minimal volume/height changes in radiographies. However, smaller sizes of residual biomaterials were observed in the histological samples from the test compared to control sites, despite the use of the same sizes of both biomaterials.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that DPBM might produce comparable bone formation and volumetric stability with DBBM in maxillary sinus grafting, however, further clinical study with longer-term periods and larger sample sizes should be needed for confirming this suggestion.
OBJECTIVES: The present randomized controlled clinical trial aimed to compare histological bone quality and radiographic volume stability in maxillary sinuses grafted with DPBM and DBBM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty sinuses in 16 participants were enrolled and randomly allocated to control and test groups using sequentially numbered, sealed envelopes; laterally approached sinus grafting with DBBM and DPBM, respectively. All participants were blinded to the group assignment during the entire experiment. After standardized osteotomy at the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus, the sinus membrane was elevated, and the control or test biomaterial was grafted. Computed tomography (CT) images were taken immediately after surgery, and another CT and trephine biopsy was taken for radiographic and histological analyses after 6 months. The histological bone quality was measured as a primary outcome, and changes in the height and volume of the graft were evaluated in the reconstructed CT images as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS: Fifteen sites (7 and 8 sites for control and test group) in 11 participants were finally included in the per protocol (PP) analysis, and 16 sites (7 and 9 sites, respectively) in 12 participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis; there were four drop-outs and one minor protocol violation. In both statistical analyses, the test groups showed comparable new bone formation and residual biomaterials in histology, and both groups exhibited minimal volume/height changes in radiographies. However, smaller sizes of residual biomaterials were observed in the histological samples from the test compared to control sites, despite the use of the same sizes of both biomaterials.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that DPBM might produce comparable bone formation and volumetric stability with DBBM in maxillary sinus grafting, however, further clinical study with longer-term periods and larger sample sizes should be needed for confirming this suggestion.
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