Histopathological comparison of healing after maxillary sinus augmentation using xenograft mixed with autogenous bone versus allograft mixed with autogenous bone

dc.contributor.authorGalindo Moreno, Pablo
dc.contributor.authorBuitrago, J. G.
dc.contributor.authorPadial Molina, M.
dc.contributor.authorFernández Barbero, Juan Emilio
dc.contributor.authorAta-Ali Mahmud, Francisco Javier
dc.contributor.authorO Valle, F.
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-07T16:18:22Z
dc.date.available2017-11-07T16:18:22Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.description.abstractTo compare the clinical and histologic outcomes of two different grafting materials (allograft and xenograft) when combined with autogenous bone and covered with a collagen membrane for sinus augmentation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A parallel case series of fourteen patients in need of a unilateral sinus augmentation was evaluated in this study. Seven patients received a graft composed by autologous cortical bone (ACB) and anorganic bovine bone in a ratio of 1:1; the other seven patients received ACB mixed with an allograft in the same ratio. Bone biopsies were obtained 6 months after sinus augmentation at the time of implant placement. Comparative histomorphometrical, histopathological, and immunohistochemical analyses were conducted and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: After 12 months of functional loading, all implants in both groups were clinical and radiographically successful. Histomorphometrically, although the initial bone formation was not significantly different between groups (new mineralized tissue: 41.03(12.87)% vs. 34.50(13.18)%, p = .620; allograft vs. xenograft groups), the graft resorbed faster in the allograft group (remnant graft particles: 9.83[7.77]% vs. 21.71[17.88]%; p = .026; allograft vs. xenograft groups). Non-mineralized tissue did not statistically differ either (49.00[14.32]% vs. 43.79[19.90]%; p = .710; allograft vs. xenograft groups). The histologic analyses revealed higher cellular content, four times more osteoid lines, and higher vascularization in the xenograft group. Musashi-1 (mesenchymal stromal cell marker) was also more intensively expressed in the xenograft group (p = .019). CONCLUSIONS: Both composite grafts generate adequate substratum to receive dental implants after healing. Compared with the xenograft composite, allograft composite shows faster turnover and a quicker decrease in biological action after 6 months.spa
dc.description.filiationUEVspa
dc.description.impact3.825 JCR (2018) Q1, 5/91 Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine, 14/80 Engineering, Biomedicalspa
dc.description.impact2.344 SJR (2018) Q1, 1/50 Oral Surgeryspa
dc.description.impactNo data IDR 2018spa
dc.description.sponsorshipSin financiaciónspa
dc.identifier.citationGalindo-Moreno, P., de Buitrago, J. G., Padial-Molina, M., Fernández-Barbero, J. E., & Ata-Ali, J. (2018). Histopathological comparison of healing after maxillary sinus augmentation using xenograft mixed with autogenous bone versus allograft mixed with autogenous bone. Clinical oral implants research, 29(2), 192-201.spa
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/clr.13098
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161
dc.identifier.issn1600-0501
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11268/6737
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.peerreviewedSispa
dc.rights.accessRightsrestricted accessspa
dc.subject.uemOdontologíaspa
dc.subject.unescoOdontologíaspa
dc.titleHistopathological comparison of healing after maxillary sinus augmentation using xenograft mixed with autogenous bone versus allograft mixed with autogenous bonespa
dc.typejournal articlespa
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication855b2485-4d1e-486d-a75c-3f20c6f97969
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery855b2485-4d1e-486d-a75c-3f20c6f97969

Files