Evidence Hub

Biphasic hydroxyapatite and ß-tricalcium phosphate biomaterial behavior in a case series of maxillary sinus augmentation in humans

Olaechea A, Mendoza-Azpur G, O Valle F, Padial-Molina M, Martin-Morales N, Galindo-Moreno P

Clinical oral implants research, 2019

10 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the morphometric components and the histological properties of pristine bone and bone grafted with a biphasic ß-tricalcium phosphate in humans using the maxillary sinus model. Reparative mesenchymal stem cells in the pristine bone and graft were also evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this prospective case series, sinus augmentation was performed using a biphasic ß-tricalcium phosphate. After 6 months of healing, a core of remnant native alveolar bone and grafted bone was collected with a trephine. Histological, histomorphometrical, and immunohistochemical techniques were performed. Radiological analysis through cone beam computerized tomography was also conducted.

RESULTS: A total of 10 patients were enrolled in this study. Radiologically, patients showed an average increase of crestal bone of 8.03 ± 1.72 mm. Morphologically, the grafted area was composed by 34.93 ± 14.68% of new mineralized tissue, 9.82 ± 11.42% of remnant biomaterial particles, and 55.23 ± 11.03% non-mineralized tissue. Histologically, we found no differences in the number of osteocytes per mm2 (p = 0.674), osteoblasts (p = 0.893), and blood vessels (p = 0.894) in the grafted area compared to the pristine bone. Differences were found on the number of osteoclasts (15.57 ± 27.50 vs. 5.37 ± 16.12, p = 0.027). The number of Musashi-1 positive mesenchymal cells (239.61 ± 177.4 vs. 42.11 ± 52.82, p = 0.027) was also significantly higher in the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free