Implant survival rates after maxillary sinus augmentation.

Department of Technologies for Health, Dental Clinic, IRCCS Galeazzi Institute, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
European Journal Of Oral Sciences (Impact Factor: 1.73). 01/2009; 116(6):497-506. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00571.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Implant therapy in the atrophic posterior maxilla becomes challenging in the presence of reduced maxillary bone height. Sinus augmentation can be performed for resolving this condition prior to implant placement. The aim of this article was therefore to evaluate implant survival rates in the grafted sinus taking into account the influence of the implant surface, graft material, and implant placement timing. A systematic review of the literature was performed. Articles retrieved from electronic databases were screened using specific inclusion criteria, and data extracted were divided according to: graft material (autogenous, non-autogenous, composite graft), implant surface (machined or textured), and implant placement (simultaneous with grafting or delayed). Fifty-nine articles were included. Survival rates for implants placed in grafts made of bone substitutes alone and grafts of composite material were slightly better than the survival rates for implants placed in 100% autogenous grafts. Over 90% of implants associated with non-autogenous grafts had a textured surface. Textured surfaces achieved better outcomes compared with machined surfaces, and this was independent of the graft material. Simultaneous and delayed procedures had similar outcomes. It may be concluded that bone substitutes can be successfully used for sinus augmentation, reducing donor-site morbidity. Long-term studies are needed to confirm the performance of non-autogenous grafts. The use of implants with a textured surface may improve the outcome in any graft type.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Background This study compared the material-specific tissue response to the synthetic, hydroxyapatite-based bone substitute material Nanobone® (NB) with that of the xenogeneic, bovine-based bone substitute material Bio-Oss® (BO) .Materials and Methods The sinus cavities of 14 human patients were augmented with NB and BO in a split-mouth design. Six months after augmentation, bone biopsies were extracted for histological and histomorphometric investigation prior to dental implant insertion.The cellular inflammatory pattern, the induction of multinucleated giant cells, vascularization, the relative amounts of newly formed bone, connective tissue and the remaining bone substitute material were evaluated. ResultsNB granules were well integrated in the peri-implant tissue and were surrounded by newly formed bone tissue. Multinucleated giant cells were visible on the surfaces of the remaining granules. BO granules were integrated into the newly formed bone tissue, which originated from active osteoblasts on their surface. Histomorphometric analysis showed a significantly higher number of multinucleated giant cells and blood vessels in the NB group compared to the BO group. No statistical differences were observed in regard to connective tissue, remaining bone substitute and newly formed bone. Conclusion The results of this study highlight the different cellular reactions to synthetic and xenogeneic bone substitute materials. The significantly higher number of multinucleated giant cells within the NB implantation bed seems to have no effect on its biodegradation. Accordingly, the multinucleated giant cells observed within the NB implantation bed have characteristics more similar to those of foreign body giant cells than to those of osteoclasts.
    Journal of Oral Implantology 12/2014; DOI:10.1563/aaid-joi-D-14-00273 · 0.98 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The maxillary posterior edentulous region presents a challenge when planning for restoring missing teeth with a dental implant. The available bone in such cases is often not dense and not adequate for the placement of a properly sized implant because of maxillary sinus pneumatization and alveolar bone loss. Maxillary sinus lift is a predictable procedure to provide adequate bone height for the purpose of implant placement. However, complications are encountered during or after the execution of the sinus lift procedure. In this article, the prevention and management of maxillary sinus complications are discussed. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Dental Clinics of North America 11/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.cden.2014.09.005
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: When multiple implants are to be placed, and a pneumatized sinus exists, the published reports suggest that the lateral window approach (LWA) is favored for sinus floor augmentation. Simultaneously, if a transcrestal sinus floor augmentation has been carried out (bone-added osteotome sinus floor elevation), the reports are restricted to single implant placement at any site. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes at adjacent transcrestal sinus augmentation grafts using deproteinized bovine bone material, with the immediate placement of submerged adjacent implants, and so determining the fate of the graft material. The progressive loss of the inter-implant graft is reported for the LWA Technique. However, this novel coalescence method has shown a progressive increase in the inter-implant graft region, thus inferring a positive bony regeneration and remodelling at the region. These results indicate that the carrying out of a large scale study is warranted to confirm the efficacy of this technique.
    European journal of dentistry 10/2014; 8(4):553-8. DOI:10.4103/1305-7456.143642

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 29, 2014