Evidence Hub

Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation with Porcine-Apatite Xenograft: A Prospective Case Series Study

Soardi CM, Cavani F, Soardi B, Zaffe D, Wang HL

The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry, 2023

24 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Bone substitutes sometimes are unsuccessful in replacing the autogenous bone graft, combining the advantages and disadvantages to achieve satisfactory results. The aim of this work was to clinically and histologically evaluate the outcome of porcine-apatite xenograft used to elevate the maxillary sinus floor in severe atrophy ridge. A two-stage crestal window sinus lift protocol was conducted in 24 patients with crestal bone ≤2mm. Highly porous porcine carbonate apatite moistened with saline solution was placed in the elevated sinus cavity as the sole grafting material. Bone core biopsies were taken at 6, 9 and 12 months after the sinus augmentation surgery at the time of implant placement. The treatment outcome was assessed using the μCT (micro computed tomogram) and histological analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by the post-hoc Dunn multiple comparison test. At 6 months after implant placement, all implants achieved good primary stability (≥ 30 Ncm of insertion torque) and successfully osseointegrated. The residual graft amount (m±SE) was low (11.91±1.99%) at 6 months, and further decreased (6.11±2.64%) at 12 months after the sinus augmentation surgery. On the contrary, the amount of new bone detected was 18.94±4.08% at 6 months, and significantly (p<0.05) increased (40.16±5.27%) 12 months after sinus augmentation surgery. Histological assessment revealed existing of osteoclasts in resorbing the graft as well…

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: 24 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