RESUMO
PURPOSE: This pilot study evaluated and compared the degree of new bone formation following maxillary sinus graft (MSG) using three different bone graft materials. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with an edentulous posterior maxilla (unilateral or bilateral) were included in this study and underwent a two-stage procedure. Each sinus was randomly assigned one of the three graft materials: anorganic bovine bone mineral (ABBM), anorganic equine bone mineral (AEBM), or mineralized cancellous bone allograft (MCBA). Bone core samples were obtained from the lateral wall of the grafted sites at least 8 months after MSG. Bone quality was evaluated during bone core retrieval. The samples were histomorphometrically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn-Bonferroni tests at the significance level of α = .05. RESULTS: A total of 28 sinuses (14 unilateral and 7 bilateral) from 21 subjects, with a mean age of 61.5 (range, 33-75) years, were included in the study. Twenty-eight bone cores (ABBM [n = 9], AEBM [n = 9], and MCBA [n = 10]) were obtained at a mean healing time of 9.1 (range, 8-12) months. Six maxillary sinus membrane perforations (≤ 5 mm) were noted and repaired during surgery (21.4%). Histomorphometric analysis of the harvested bone cores revealed statistically significant differences in the percentage of vital bone (VB%), residual bone materials (RBM%), and connective tissue/marrow (CT%) among the different graft materials (Kruskal-Wallis; P < .05). The VB% in the MCBA group (32.0% ± 12.4%) was significantly greater than those in the ABBM (10.9% ± 8.9%) and AEBM (9.1% ± 5.9%) groups (P < .05). The RBM% in the MCBA group (5.5% ± 5.7%) was, however, significantly less than those in the ABBM (34.3% ± 12.1%) and AEBM (38.9% ± 5.3%) groups (P < .05). There were no significant differences in VB% and RBM% between ABBM and AEBM (P = 1.0). Newly formed bone and residual graft materials were integrated into the surrounding tissue with no sign of inflammation or foreign-body reaction. CONCLUSION: Within the confines of the study, MCBA has significantly greater new bone formation than ABBM and AEBM. AEBM showed comparable histomorphometric results in all parameters (VB%, RBM%, CT%) to ABBM.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: This pilot study evaluated and compared the degree of new bone formation following maxillary sinus graft (MSG) using three different bone graft materials. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with an edentulous posterior maxilla (unilateral or bilateral) were included in this study and underwent a two-stage procedure. Each sinus was randomly assigned one of the three graft materials: anorganic bovine bone mineral (ABBM), anorganic equine bone mineral (AEBM), or mineralized cancellous bone allograft (MCBA). Bone core samples were obtained from the lateral wall of the grafted sites at least 8 months after MSG. Bone quality was evaluated during bone core retrieval. The samples were histomorphometrically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn-Bonferroni tests at the significance level of α = .05. RESULTS: A total of 28 sinuses (14 unilateral and 7 bilateral) from 21 subjects, with a mean age of 61.5 (range, 33-75) years, were included in the study. Twenty-eight bone cores (ABBM [n = 9], AEBM [n = 9], and MCBA [n = 10]) were obtained at a mean healing time of 9.1 (range, 8-12) months. Six maxillary sinus membrane perforations (≤ 5 mm) were noted and repaired during surgery (21.4%). Histomorphometric analysis of the harvested bone cores revealed statistically significant differences in the percentage of vital bone (VB%), residual bone materials (RBM%), and connective tissue/marrow (CT%) among the different graft materials (Kruskal-Wallis; P < .05). The VB% in the MCBA group (32.0% ± 12.4%) was significantly greater than those in the ABBM (10.9% ± 8.9%) and AEBM (9.1% ± 5.9%) groups (P < .05). The RBM% in the MCBA group (5.5% ± 5.7%) was, however, significantly less than those in the ABBM (34.3% ± 12.1%) and AEBM (38.9% ± 5.3%) groups (P < .05). There were no significant differences in VB% and RBM% between ABBM and AEBM (P = 1.0). Newly formed bone and residual graft materials were integrated into the surrounding tissue with no sign of inflammation or foreign-body reaction. CONCLUSION: Within the confines of the study, MCBA has significantly greater new bone formation than ABBM and AEBM. AEBM showed comparable histomorphometric results in all parameters (VB%, RBM%, CT%) to ABBM.