LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 24 , Issue 6
November/December 2009

Pages 10931100


Clinical Histology of Microimplants Placed in Two Different Biomaterials

Christer Lindgren, DDS/Lars Sennerby, DDS, PhD/Arne Mordenfeld, DDS/Mats Hallman, DDS, PhD


PMID: 20162114

Purpose: This randomized, controlled study was designed to compare bone formation around microimplants with a sandblasted, acid-etched surface placed at the time of maxillary sinus floor augmentation with a synthetic biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) or deproteinized bovine bone (DBB). Materials and Methods: Nine completely edentulous patients and two partially edentulous patients (six women, five men) with a mean age of 67 years (range, 50 to 79 years) requiring bilateral sinus augmentation were included in the study. The patients were randomized for augmentation with BCP (test) in one side and DBB (control) in the contralateral side. At the time of augmentation, one microimplant on each side was placed vertically from the top of the alveolar crest, penetrating the residual bone and the grafting material. After 8 months of graft healing, at the time of ordinary implant placement, all 22 microimplants were retrieved with a surrounding bone core for histologic analyses. Results: The bone-to-implant contact in the BCP group was 64.6% 9.0%, versus 55.0% 16.0% for the DBB group. The difference was not significant. The corresponding values for the area of newly formed bone in the biopsies were 41.1% 9.8% and 41.6% 14.0% for BCP and DBB, respectively. There were significantly more DBB particles in contact with newly formed bone than BCP particles (87.9 18.2% versus 53.9 26.1%; Wilcoxon rank sum test; P = .007). Conclusion: In this randomized, controlled clinical trial, new bone formation and bone-to-implant contact around microimplants with a sandblasted, acid-etched surface was found to be equivalent between sinuses augmented with BCP or DBB. Significantly more DBB particles than BCP particles were in contact with newly formed bone, but the clinical relevance of this has yet to be established. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:10931100


Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

 

© 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help