JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association · 2013
Marginal bone resorption around dental implants placed in grafted sinuses; an up-to-30-month clinical and radiological follow-up.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Schreuder Max I, Hoeve Marieke A, Hebeda Konnie M, Verdijk Marian A, Ligtenberg Marjolijn J, Bot Frederik J, Chott Andreas, van Krieken J Han J M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative success of two different bone grafting material - putty and powder forms of De-mineralised Bone Matrix (DBM) - used in sinus lift procedure.
METHODS: The retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey, and comprised data related to the patients referred for bilateral maxillary sinus augmentation between 2007 and 2010. During the period, 48 endoosseous implants were placed concurrently with the sinus augmentation in 12 patients. Marginal bone loss around the implants was measured at the time of loading, 12 and 30 months after the treatment. SPSS 11.5 was used for data analysis.
RESULTS: Of the 12 patients, 8 (66.6%) were females and 4 (33.3%) were males. All implants osseointegrated in both the putty and powder groups well without any significant clinical finding. The average volume of marginal bone resorption at implants for the putty side was 0.43 +/- 0.22 mm, 0.8 +/- 0.33 mm and 1.12 +/- 0.49 mm at prosthetic loading, 12-month and 30-month follow-up, respectively. For the powder side, the corresponding numbers were 0.48 +/- 0.32 mm, 0.82 +/- 0.46 mm and 1.24 +/- 0.57 mm. No statistically significant difference in bone loss between the two groups was observed (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Both putty and powder forms of de-mineralised Bone Matrix showed satisfactory results and there was no significant difference in marginal bone loss around dental implants and survival rates.
METHODS: The retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey, and comprised data related to the patients referred for bilateral maxillary sinus augmentation between 2007 and 2010. During the period, 48 endoosseous implants were placed concurrently with the sinus augmentation in 12 patients. Marginal bone loss around the implants was measured at the time of loading, 12 and 30 months after the treatment. SPSS 11.5 was used for data analysis.
RESULTS: Of the 12 patients, 8 (66.6%) were females and 4 (33.3%) were males. All implants osseointegrated in both the putty and powder groups well without any significant clinical finding. The average volume of marginal bone resorption at implants for the putty side was 0.43 +/- 0.22 mm, 0.8 +/- 0.33 mm and 1.12 +/- 0.49 mm at prosthetic loading, 12-month and 30-month follow-up, respectively. For the powder side, the corresponding numbers were 0.48 +/- 0.32 mm, 0.82 +/- 0.46 mm and 1.24 +/- 0.57 mm. No statistically significant difference in bone loss between the two groups was observed (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Both putty and powder forms of de-mineralised Bone Matrix showed satisfactory results and there was no significant difference in marginal bone loss around dental implants and survival rates.