Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024
Three-dimensional volumetric assessment and stability of simultaneously placed implant following sinus floor augmentation with deproteinized human demineralized tooth matrix or deproteinized bovine bone mineral: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Paetnukroh Nattha, Leepong Narit, Suttapreyasri Srisurang
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to analyze and compare three-dimensional volumetric bone changes and stability of simultaneously placed dental implants following sinus augmentation using deproteinized human demineralized tooth matrix (dpDTM) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM).
METHODS: Twenty-four patients who required lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation with simultaneous dental implant placement were randomly assigned to receive either dpDTM (n = 12) or DBBM (n = 12). Cone-beam computed tomography and resonance frequency analysis of implant stability were conducted immediately after surgery and 6 months postoperatively. Changes in the graft sinus floor and graft height volumes in the sagittal and coronal views, along with the implant stability quotient (ISQ), were analyzed and compared.
RESULTS: Volumetric graft alteration was comparable between dpDTM (120.33 ± 77.48 mm3) and DBBM (108.51 ± 65.15 mm3) (p = 0.690). Reduction in the average graft height was also comparable: dpDTM group ranged from - 0.59 to - 0.93 mm and the DBBM group ranged from - 0.55 to - 0.82 mm (p > 0.05) at most examined levels. However, greater reduction in the mesial-graft height occurred in the dpDTM group (- 1.08 ± 0.70 mm vs. -0.58 ± 0.39 mm, p = 0.04). The ISQ values increased similarly in both groups to reach 70 at 6 months.
CONCLUSION: dpDTM demonstrated comparable stability in graft volume and height during the healing process compared to DBBM and could serve as a viable alternative to DBBM for sinus floor augmentation with simultaneous implant placement.
METHODS: Twenty-four patients who required lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation with simultaneous dental implant placement were randomly assigned to receive either dpDTM (n = 12) or DBBM (n = 12). Cone-beam computed tomography and resonance frequency analysis of implant stability were conducted immediately after surgery and 6 months postoperatively. Changes in the graft sinus floor and graft height volumes in the sagittal and coronal views, along with the implant stability quotient (ISQ), were analyzed and compared.
RESULTS: Volumetric graft alteration was comparable between dpDTM (120.33 ± 77.48 mm3) and DBBM (108.51 ± 65.15 mm3) (p = 0.690). Reduction in the average graft height was also comparable: dpDTM group ranged from - 0.59 to - 0.93 mm and the DBBM group ranged from - 0.55 to - 0.82 mm (p > 0.05) at most examined levels. However, greater reduction in the mesial-graft height occurred in the dpDTM group (- 1.08 ± 0.70 mm vs. -0.58 ± 0.39 mm, p = 0.04). The ISQ values increased similarly in both groups to reach 70 at 6 months.
CONCLUSION: dpDTM demonstrated comparable stability in graft volume and height during the healing process compared to DBBM and could serve as a viable alternative to DBBM for sinus floor augmentation with simultaneous implant placement.