MAXILLARY SINUS LIFTING PROCEDURES USING XENOGENEIC CORTICO-CANCELLOUS GRAFT MATERIAL WITH SIMULTANEOUS IMPLANT PLACEMENT: A 1- TO 3-YEAR FOLLOW-UP

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 28 Sayı: 1, 1 - 6, 28.03.2018

Adnan Kılınç , Mert Ataol Ertunç Dayı

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.410298

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the clinical
outcomes of laterally approached sinus floor lifting with xenografts and
simultaneously dental implant placement procedures.

Material and Methods: All patients treated with sinus lifting and simultaneous implant
placement procedure and were followed for at least 1
year were retrospectively selected for this study. The
lateral window technique was performed using a xenogeneic cortico-cancellous grafting material and bone-level implants were placed immediately. Survival rates of
implants and clinical features of patients and implants were evaluated.

Results: A sample of 30 patients, 42 implants were placed according to the one-stage approach. Residual preoperatively alveolar ridge height varied between 3 and 6 mm
with a mean of 4.58 mm and the bone gain at 1-year follow-up varied between 6
mm and 10 mm with a mean of 8.6 mm. Only two
implants were lost before loading and overall survival rate was 96% for the implant-based analysis.

Conclusions: Maxillary sinus
lifting procedure with xenogeneic cortico-cancellous graft material and
simultaneously implant placement was showed as a predictable and successful
treatment modality.

Keywords: Biomaterials,
dental implant, sinus floor augmentation, xenograft

KSENOJEN KORTİKOKANSELLÖZ GREFT MATERYALİ KULLANILAN MAKSİLLER SİNÜS
TABANI YÜKSELTİLMESİ PROSEDÜRÜYLE EŞ ZAMANLI İMPLANT YERLEŞTİRİLMESİ: 1 – 3
YILLIK TAKİP


Amaç: Bu çalışmanın hedefi ksenogreft kullanılan lateral yaklaşım ile maksiller sinüs tabanı yükseltilmesi ve eş zamanlı implant yerleşimi işleminin kGelinik sonuçlarının retrospektif olarak değerlendirilmesidir

Gereç ve
Yöntem: Tüm hastalara sinus tabanı yükseltme işlemi ile eş
zamanlı implant yerleşimi uygulanmış ve en az 1 yıl süreyle takip edilmiştir. Hayvan
kaynaklı kortikokansellöz greft materyali ve lateral pencere tekniği uygulanmış
ve aynı esnada kemik seviyesinde implantlar yerleştirilmiştir. İmplantların
sağkalım oranları ve hastaların klinik özellikleri değerlendirilmiştir.

Bulgular: 30 hasta üzerinde tek aşamalı yaklaşım ile 42 implant yerleştirilmiştir. Preoperatif rezidüel alveolar kemik yüksekliği 3 mm ile 6 mm arasında değişmektedir ve ortalama 4,58 mm’dir ve 1 yıllık takiplerde kemik kazanımı 6 mm ile 10 mm arasında değişmektedir ve ortalama 8,6 mm’dir. Sadece 2 implant yükleme öncesinde kaybedilmiştir ve implant sağ kalım oranı %96 olarak görülmüştür.

Sonuç: Ksenojen kortikokansellöz kemik grefti kullanılan maksiller sinus tabanı yükseltme işlemi ile eş zamanlı implant yerleşimi öngörülebilir ve başarılı bir tedavi yöntemi olarak görülmektedir.  

  Sonuç: Ksenojen kortikokansellöz kemik grefti kullanılan maksiller sinus tabanı yükseltme işlemi ile eş zamanlı implant yerleşimi öngörülebilir ve başarılı bir tedavi yöntemi olarak görülmektedir. 

Anahtar kelimeler: Biyomateryaller,
diş implantı, sinüs taban yükseltmesi, ksenograf

Anahtar Kelimeler

Biomaterials, dental implant, sinus floor augmentation

Kaynakça

• 1. Chang SH, Lin CL, Hsue SS, Lin YS, Huang SR. Biomechanical analysis of the effects of implant diameter and bone quality in short implants placed in the atrophic posterior maxilla. Med Eng Phys 2012;34:153-60. doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.07.005.
• 2. Marx RE. Alveolar Bone Augmentation via In Situ Tissue Engineering. in Tolstunov L, Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Augmentation in Implant Dentistry: A Surgical Manual Wiley: 2015 p:297-310
• 3. Esposito M, Barausse C, Pistilli R, Sammartino G, Grandi G, Felice P. Short implants versus bone augmentation for placing longer implants in atrophic maxillae: One-year post-loading results of a pilot randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol 2015;8:257-68.
• 4. Jurisic M, Markovic A, Radulovic M, Brkovic BMB, Sandor GKB. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation: comparing osteotome with lateral window immediate and delayed implant placements. An interim report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106:820-7. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.04.025.
• 5. Umanjec‐Korac S, Wu G, Hassan B, Liu Y, Wismeijer D. A retrospective analysis of the resorption rate of deproteinized bovine bone as maxillary sinus graft material on cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:781-5.
• 6. Jensen OT, Brownd C, Baer D. Maxillary molar sinus floor intrusion at the time of dental extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006;64:1415-9.
• 7. Fugazzotto PA. Sinus floor augmentation at the time of maxillary molar extraction: technique and report of preliminary results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 1999;14:536-42.
• 8. Doobrow JH, Leite RS, Hirsch HZ. Concomitant oroantral communication repair and immediate implant placement: a five-year case report. Implant Dent 2008; 17: 176-81. doi:10. 1097/ID. 0b013e318166dbe7.
• 9. Tatum Jr H. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dent Clin North Am 1986;30:207-29.
• 10. Galindo-Moreno P, Avila G, Fernandez-Barbero JE, et al. Evaluation of sinus floor elevation using a composite bone graft mixture. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:376-82. doi:10.1111/j.1600- 0501.2007.01337.x.
• 11. Lambert F, Lecloux G, Rompen E. One-step approach for implant placement and subantral bone regeneration using bovine hydroxyapatite: a 2- to 6-year follow-up study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25:598-606.
• 12. Pjetursson BE, Tan WC, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation: Part I: Lateral approach. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35:216-40. doi:10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01272.x.
• 13. Galindo‐Moreno P, Moreno‐Riestra I, Ávila G, et al. Histomorphometric comparison of maxillary pristine bone and composite bone graft biopsies obtained after sinus augmentation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:122-8.
• 14. Murugan R, Ramakrishna S. Development of nanocomposites for bone grafting. Compos Sci Technol 2005;65:2385-406. doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.07.022.
• 15. Karabuda C, Ozdemir O, Tosun T, Anil A, Olgaç V. Histological and clinical evaluation of 3 different grafting materials for sinus lifting procedure based on 8 cases. J Periodontol 2001;72:1436-42.
• 16. Yildirim M, Spiekermann H, Biesterfeld S, Edelhoff D. Maxillary sinus augmentation using xenogenic bone substitute material Bio-Oss in combination with venous blood. A histologic and histomorphometric study in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:217-29. 17. MacHtei EE, Mahler D, Oettinger-Barak O, Zuabi O, Horwitz J. Dental implants placed in previously failed sites: Survival rate and factors affecting the outcome. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:259-64. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01466.x.
• 18. Wittneben J, Buser D, Salvi GE, Bürgin W, Hicklin S, Brägger U. Complication and Failure Rates with Implant‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses and Single Crowns: A 10‐Year Retrospective Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2014;16:356-64.
• 19. van Steenberghe D, Jacobs R, Desnyder M, Maffei G, Quirynen M. The relative impact of local and endogenous patient-related factors on implant failure up to the abutment stage. Clin Oral Implant Res 2002;13:617-22.
• 20. Browaeys H, Defrancq J, Dierens MCA, et al. A retrospective analysis of early and immediately loaded osseotite implants in cross-arch rehabilitations in edentulous maxillas and mandibles up to 7 years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013; 15:380-9. doi:10.1111/j.1708.8208.2011.00367.x.
• 21. Fortin T, Camby E, Alik M, Isidori M, Bouchet H. Panoramic images versus three-dimensional planning software for oral implant planning in atrophied posterior maxillary: A clinical radiological study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013;15:198-204. doi:10. 1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00342.x. 22. Peleg M, Garg AK, Mazor Z. Predictability of simultaneous implant placement in the severely atrophic posterior maxilla: A 9-year longitudinal experience study of 2132 implants placed into 731 human sinus grafts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:94-102.
• 23. Zinser MJ, Randelzhofer P, Kuiper L, Zoller JE, De Lange GL. The predictors of implant failure after maxillary sinus floor augmentation and reconstruction: a retrospective study of 1045 consecutive Implants Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013;115:571-82. doi:10.1016/j.oooo. 2012.06.015.
• 24. Alsaadi G, Quirynen M, Komárek A, Van Steenberghe D. Impact of local and systemic factors on the incidence of oral implant failures, up to abutment connection. J Clin Periodontol 2007; 34:610-7.doi:10.1111/j.1600-051X.2007.01077.x.
• 25. Gerressen M, Hermanns-Sachweh B, Riediger D, Hilgers R-D, Spiekermann H, Ghassemi A. Purely cancellous vs. corticocancellous bone in sinus floor augmentation with autogenous iliac crest: a prospective clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:109-15.doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008. 01619.x. 26. Mardinger O, Chaushu G, Sigalov S. Factors affecting changes in sinus graft height between and above the placed Implants Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;111:e6-e11. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.09.064.
• 27. Özkan Y, Akoğlu B, Kulak-Özkan Y. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation using bovine bone grafts with simultaneous implant placement: a 5-year prospective follow-up study. Implant Dent 2011;20:455-9.
• 28. Kim Y-K, Yun P-Y, Kim S-G, Kim B-S, Ong JL. Evaluation of sinus bone resorption and marginal bone loss after sinus bone grafting and implant placement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107:e21-8.doi:10.1016/j. tripleo. 2008.09.033.
• 29. Al-Nawas B, Schiegnitz E. Augmentation procedures using bone substitute materials or autogenous bone - a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Oral Implantol 2014;7:219-34.
• 30. Ali SA, Karthigeyan S, Deivanai M, Kumar A. Implant Rehabilitation For Atrophic Maxilla: A Review. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2014;14:196-207.
• 31. Maiorana C, Sigurta D, Mirandola A, Garlini G, Santoro F. Sinus elevation with alloplasts or xenogenic materials and implants: an up-to-4-year clinical and radiologic follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:426-32.
• 32. Tidwell JK, Blijdorp PA, Stoelinga PJW, Brouns JB, Hinderks F. Composite grafting of the maxillary sinus for placement of endosteal Implants A preliminary report of 48 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1992;21:204-9.
• 33. Borges FL, Dias RO, Piattelli A, et al. Simultaneous sinus membrane elevation and dental implant placement without bone graft: a 6-month follow-up study. J Periodontol 2011;82:403-12. doi:10.1902/jop.2010.100343.
• 34. Thor A, Sennerby L, Hirsch JM, Rasmusson L. Bone Formation at the Maxillary Sinus Floor Following Simultaneous Elevation of the Mucosal Lining and Implant Installation Without Graft Material: An Evaluation of 20 Patients Treated With 44 Astra Tech Implants J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65:64-72. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2006.10.047.
• 35. Canullo L, Patacchia O, Sisti A, Heinemann F. Implant restoration 3 months after one stage sinus lift surgery in severely resorbed maxillae: 2-year results of a multicenter prospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:412-20. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00261