Share Page:

Volume 14 , Issue 3
May/June 1999

Pages 329–336

Maxillary Sinus Augmentation Prior to Placement of Endosseous Implants: A Histomorphometric Analysis

Oliver Hanisch, DMD, MS, Jaime L. Lozada, DDS, Ralph E. Holmes, MD, Christopher J. Calhoun, MBA Research Manager, Joseph Y. K. Kan, DDS Assistant Professor Hubertus Spiekermann, MD, DDS, PhD

PMID: 10379105

The aim of this prospective study was to histomorphometrically evaluate at various time intervals the mineralization stage and process of an allogeneic-xenogeneic bone graft used in sinus augmentation procedures. One biopsy was taken from 20 patients at either 6, 8, 10, or 12 months after sinus augmentation. Immediately following the biopsy, an endosseous implant was placed into the biopsy site. This protocol provided 4 groups of 5 patients each, based on healing time following sinus augmentation. Using backscattered electron image analysis, the specimens were histomorphometrically analyzed to determine the volume fractions of residual cancellous bone, newly formed bone, soft tissue, bovine hydroxyapatite, and “remineralized” freeze-dried demineralized bone allograft (rDFDBA). “Remineralization” of DFDBA particles was observed in a few areas in all specimens. Polarized light microscopy showed that only the 12-month biopsies had a predominance of lamellar bone formation. The area within the biopsies that represented the residual alveolar ridge consisted of 32.6% ± 8.6% (mean ± SD) of bone. In the grafted area of the biopsies the volume fraction of newly formed bone at 12 months (20.7% ± 8.3%) was significantly higher (P < .05, analysis of variance) than at 6 months (8.1% ± 3.0%). There was no statistically significant difference between newly formed bone in the inferior, central, and superior grafted areas in all 4 time intervals. This prospective study indicates that the mineralization process of an allogeneic-xenogeneic sinus graft is incomplete 6 months after the sinus augmentation procedure. New bone formation increased up to 12 months postaugmentation; however, it remained lower than the volume of residual bone. (Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:329–336) Key words: bone formation, bovine hydroxyapatite, demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft, dental implants, histomorphometry, remineralized DFDBA, sinus augmentation

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.


© 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Author Guidelines
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us