These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Bone apposition onto oral implants in the sinus area filled with different grafting materials. A histological study in beagle dogs.
    Author: Wetzel AC, Stich H, Caffesse RG.
    Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res; 1995 Sep; 6(3):155-63. PubMed ID: 7578791.
    Abstract:
    The placement of oral implants into jaw bone has a high predictability provided an adequate bone volume surrounding the implant is present to ensure primary stability and resistance to functional loading forces after completion of osseointegration. In the distal area of the maxilla, an adequate bone volume is often lacking because of the proximity of the sinus cavities. The aim of this study was to evaluate histologically the simultaneous placement of endosseous implants into the sinus cavity and the surgical elevation of the sinus floor including filling the cavity with different grafting materials. In 9 sinus areas of 5 beagle dogs, 9 titanium implants (ITI Dental Implant System) were placed, and the void space of the sinus cavity was filled simultaneously with either demineralized freeze-dried human cortical bone (Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation), resorbable hydroxyapatite (Osteogen) or natural cancelleous bovine bone mineral (Bio-Oss). To study bone formation, fluorochrome markers (tetracycline HCl and calcein green) were used at 2 and 8 weeks. Clinically, all implants healed uneventfully, and 5 months after implant placement the dogs were killed for histologic evaluation. All implants exhibited osseointegration within the pre-existing cortical bone of the sinus floor. The implants surrounded by freeze-dried bone xenografts yielded no formation of new bone, whereas the sites with hydroxyapatite or natural bovine bone mineral demonstrated newly formed bone with direct contact at the implant surface. The average extent of bone to implant contact was 25% (SD = 10.6%) and 27% (SD = 8.8%), respectively in relation to the length of the originally denuded implant surface.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]