The amount of newly formed bone in sinus grafting procedures depends on tissue depth as well as the type and residual amount of the grafted material.

OBJECTIVES Bone replacement substitutes are almost unavoidable in augmentation procedures such as sinus grafting. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the osteoconductive capability of two different scaffold fillers in inducing newly formed bone in this procedure. MATERIAL AND METHODS Sinus floor augmentation and implant placement were carried out bilaterally in 12 patients. Bovine bone mineral (BBM) was grafted on one side and beta-tricalcium phosphate (beta-TCP) on the contralateral side. Both were mixed (1:1 ratio) with autogenous cortical bone chips harvested from the mandible by a scraper. Hard tissue specimen cores were retrieved from the augmented sites (at the previous window area) at 12 months. Decalcified sections were stained with haematoxylin-eosin and the fraction area of new bone and filler particles was measured. In addition to the effect of the filler on new bone formation, the latter was tested to determine whether it correlated with the tissue depth and residual amount of the grafted material. RESULTS Bone area fraction increased significantly from peripheral to deeper areas at both grafted sites in all cores: from 26.0% to 37.7% at the beta-TCP sites and from 33.5% to 53.7% at the BBM-grafted sites. At each depth the amount of new bone in BBM sites was significantly greater than that in TCP sites. However, the average area fraction of grafted material particles was similar in both fillers and all depth levels (beta-TCP=27.9-23.2% and BBM=29.2-22.6%, NS). A significant negative correlation was found between bone area fraction and particle area fraction at the middle (p=0.009) and deep (p=0.014) depths in the beta-TCP sites, but not at the BBM sites. CONCLUSION At 12 months post-augmentation, the two examined bone fillers, beta-TCP and BBM, promoted new bone formation in sinus grafting but the amount of newly formed bone was significantly greater in BBM-grafted sites. However, both exhibited similar residual grafted material area fraction at this healing period. This could imply that BBM possesses better osteoconductive properties.

[1]  A. Skoglund,et al.  A clinical and histologic examination in humans of the osseous response to implanted natural bone mineral. , 1997, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[2]  H. Tal,et al.  Qualitative and quantitative expression of bovine bone mineral in experimental bone defects. Part 1: Description of a dog model and histological observations. , 2003, Journal of periodontology.

[3]  L. Skovgaard,et al.  Anorganic porous bovine-derived bone mineral (Bio-Oss) and ePTFE membrane in the treatment of peri-implantitis in cynomolgus monkeys. , 2003, Clinical oral implants research.

[4]  N. Fujii,et al.  A histochemical investigation of the bone formation process by guided bone regeneration in rat jaws. Effect of PTFE membrane application periods on newly formed bone. , 2000, Journal of periodontology.

[5]  T. Gao,et al.  Stabilization of an inserted tricalcium phosphate spacer enhances the healing of a segmental tibial defect in sheep , 2004, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[6]  D. Edelhoff,et al.  Maxillary sinus augmentation using xenogenic bone substitute material Bio-Oss in combination with venous blood. A histologic and histomorphometric study in humans. , 2000, Clinical oral implants research.

[7]  J. Lindhe,et al.  Healing around implants placed in bone defects treated with Bio-Oss. An experimental study in the dog. , 1997, Clinical oral implants research.

[8]  A. Scarano,et al.  Bone reactions to anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss) used in sinus augmentation procedures: a histologic long-term report of 20 cases in humans. , 1999, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[9]  S. Nyman,et al.  Healing of Bone Defects by Guided Tissue Regeneration , 1988, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[10]  S Nyman,et al.  Healing of maxillary and mandibular bone defects using a membrane technique. An experimental study in monkeys. , 1990, Scandinavian journal of plastic and reconstructive surgery and hand surgery.

[11]  H. Tal,et al.  Histopathological morphometric evaluation of 2 different hydroxyapatite-bone derivatives in sinus augmentation procedures: a comparative study in humans. , 2001, Journal of periodontology.

[12]  G. I. Anderson,et al.  In vitro osteoclast resorption of bone substitute biomaterials used for implant site augmentation: a pilot study. , 2002, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[13]  D. Dayan,et al.  Nonceramic hydroxyapatite bone derivative in sinus augmentation procedures: clinical and histomorphometric observations in 10 consecutive cases. , 2003, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[14]  U. Wikesjö,et al.  Prognostic factors for alveolar regeneration: bone formation at teeth and titanium implants. , 2004, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[15]  James Ra,et al.  Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. , 1980 .

[16]  J. Strub,et al.  Maxillary sinus augmentation using different grafting materials and dental implants in monkeys. Part IV. Evaluation of hydroxyapatite-coated implants. , 1997, Clinical oral implants research.

[17]  P Solar,et al.  Blood supply to the maxillary sinus relevant to sinus floor elevation procedures. , 1999, Clinical oral implants research.

[18]  G. Daculsi,et al.  Osteoclastic resorption of calcium phosphate ceramics with different hydroxyapatite/beta-tricalcium phosphate ratios. , 1997, Biomaterials.

[19]  H. Tal,et al.  Porous bovine bone mineral in healing of human extraction sockets. Part 1: histomorphometric evaluations at 9 months. , 2000, Journal of periodontology.

[20]  Z. Suba,et al.  Autogenous bone versus beta-tricalcium phosphate graft alone for bilateral sinus elevations (2- and 3-dimensional computed tomographic, histologic, and histomorphometric evaluations): preliminary results. , 2001, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[21]  M. Spector,et al.  The ultrastructure of anorganic bovine bone and selected synthetic hyroxyapatites used as bone graft substitute materials. , 2002, Biomaterials.

[22]  N. Lang,et al.  The biological effect of natural bone mineral on bone neoformation on the rabbit skull. , 1997, Clinical oral implants research.

[23]  S. Lindskog,et al.  A clinical histologic study of bovine hydroxyapatite in combination with autogenous bone and fibrin glue for maxillary sinus floor augmentation. Results after 6 to 8 months of healing. , 2001, Clinical oral implants research.

[24]  F. Melsen,et al.  Tissue reaction and material characteristics of four bone substitutes. , 1996, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[25]  Haim Tal,et al.  Biomaterial resorption rate and healing site morphology of inorganic bovine bone and beta-tricalcium phosphate in the canine: a 24-month longitudinal histologic study and morphometric analysis. , 2004, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[26]  R. Holmes,et al.  Maxillary sinus augmentation prior to placement of endosseous implants: A histomorphometric analysis. , 1999, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[27]  H F Morris,et al.  Long-term assessment (5 to 71 months) of endosseous dental implants placed in the augmented maxillary sinus. , 2000, Annals of periodontology.

[28]  R. Haas,et al.  Bovine hydroxyapatite for maxillary sinus grafting: comparative histomorphometric findings in sheep , 1998 .

[29]  L. Sennerby,et al.  A prospective 1-year clinical and radiographic study of implants placed after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with bovine hydroxyapatite and autogenous bone. , 2002, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[30]  Z. Artzi,et al.  The application of deproteinized bovine bone mineral for ridge preservation prior to implantation. Clinical and histological observations in a case report. , 1998, Journal of periodontology.

[31]  M. Neo,et al.  The expression of bone matrix protein mRNAs around beta-TCP particles implanted into bone. , 2000, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[32]  C. Hämmerle,et al.  Complication rate with prosthodontic reconstructions on ITI and IMZ dental implants , 1998 .

[33]  K. Donath,et al.  BIO-OSS--a resorbable bone substitute? , 1998, Journal of long-term effects of medical implants.

[34]  David R. Bellhouse,et al.  Area Estimation by Point-Counting Techniques: , 1981 .

[35]  H. Tal,et al.  Efficacy of porous bovine bone mineral in various types of osseous deficiencies: clinical observations and literature review. , 2001, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[36]  H. Tatum.  Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. , 1986, Dental clinics of North America.

[37]  U. Lekholm,et al.  Generation of new bone around titanium implants using a membrane technique: an experimental study in rabbits. , 1989, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[38]  A. Icaro Cornaglia,et al.  Ten-year follow-up in a maxillary sinus augmentation using anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss). A case report with histomorphometric evaluation. , 2003, Clinical oral implants research.

[39]  H. Burchardt.  The biology of bone graft repair. , 1983, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[40]  M. Spector,et al.  Anorganic bovine bone and ceramic analogs of bone mineral as implants to facilitate bone regeneration. , 1994, Clinics in plastic surgery.

[41]  J. Ouhayoun,et al.  Bone regeneration in extraction sites after immediate placement of an e-PTFE membrane with or without a biomaterial. A report on 12 consecutive cases. , 1996, Clinical oral implants research.

[42]  R. Caffesse,et al.  Bone apposition onto oral implants in the sinus area filled with different grafting materials. A histological study in beagle dogs. , 1995, Clinical oral implants research.

[43]  S. Froum,et al.  Histologic and clinical comparison of bilateral sinus floor elevations with and without barrier membrane placement in 12 patients: Part 3 of an ongoing prospective study. , 2000, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[44]  Lars Sennerby,et al.  A clinical and histologic evaluation of implant integration in the posterior maxilla after sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone, bovine hydroxyapatite, or a 20:80 mixture. , 2002, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[45]  D Abensur,et al.  Sinus grafting with porous bone mineral (Bio-Oss) for implant placement: a 5-year study on 15 patients. , 2000, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[46]  D. Dayan,et al.  Bovine-HA spongiosa blocks and immediate implant placement in sinus augmentation procedures. Histopathological and histomorphometric observations on different histological stainings in 10 consecutive patients. , 2002, Clinical oral implants research.

[47]  D Buser,et al.  Evaluation of filling materials in membrane--protected bone defects. A comparative histomorphometric study in the mandible of miniature pigs. , 1998, Clinical oral implants research.

[48]  F. Kloss,et al.  Degradation characteristics of α and β tri-calcium-phosphate (TCP) in minipigs , 2002 .

[49]  J. Martinoff,et al.  Long-term follow up of transoral rib grafts for mandibular atrophy. , 1984, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[50]  K. Ooya,et al.  Grafting of deproteinized bone particles inhibits bone resorption after maxillary sinus floor elevation. , 2004, Clinical oral implants research.

[51]  L. Sennerby,et al.  Histologic analysis of clinical biopsies taken 6 months and 3 years after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with 80% bovine hydroxyapatite and 20% autogenous bone mixed with fibrin glue. , 2001, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[52]  H. Terheyden,et al.  Sinus floor augmentation with simultaneous placement of dental implants using a combination of deproteinized bone xenografts and recombinant human osteogenic protein-1. A histometric study in miniature pigs. , 1999, Clinical oral implants research.

[53]  A. Reddi,et al.  Tricalcium phosphate and osteogenin: a bioactive onlay bone graft substitute. , 1995, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[54]  R. C. Thomson,et al.  Periodontal repair in dogs: gingival tissue occlusion, a critical requirement for GTR? , 2003, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[55]  D. Smiler,et al.  Sinus lift grafts and endosseous implants. Treatment of the atrophic posterior maxilla. , 1992, Dental clinics of North America.

[56]  H. W. Chalkley.  Method for the Quantitative Morphologic Analysis of Tissues , 1943 .

[57]  L. Bodner,et al.  Effect of salivary gland hypofunction on the healing of extraction wounds: a histomorphometric study in rats. , 1992, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.