Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone has become a widely accepted procedure in implant dentistry. The use of osteoconductive bone substitutes in this indication is controversial, since their use can lead to a prolonged healing time, inhomogenous ossification, foreign body reaction, migration of particles and low bone-implant contact (BIC). The purpose of this study was to examine whether the combination of an osteoinductive protein (recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 (rhOP-1 = bone morphogenetic protein-7) with natural bovine bone mineral (BioOss) would improve ossification and the bone-implant contact (BIC) in a sinus floor augmentation with simultaneous placement of implants. In this study, the maxillary sinus floors in 5 miniature pigs were augmented with 3 ml BioOss containing 420 micrograms rhOP-1 on the test side and 3 ml BioOss alone on the control side. At the time of augmentation a titanium implant (ITI) was inserted from a laterocaudal direction. After 6 months of healing the sites of augmentation were removed and examined in non-decalcified sections by microradiography, fluorescence microscopy of sequentially labelled specimens and by histometry. On both sides, significant amounts of newly-formed bone were observed. However, on the test sites, the percentage of BIC in the augmented area was 80.0% versus 38.6% on control sites. It can be concluded that the application of bone morphogenetic proteins caused a more rapid and enhanced osseointegration of simultaneously placed implants when compared to the bone substitute alone. Therefore recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 delivered by natural bone mineral has the potential to become a clinical alternative for autogenous bone grafts in sinus floor augmentation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Terheyden et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: