Martiniano Carlos Ricardo de Queiroz, Valadas Lídia Audrey Rocha, Lins do Carmo Filho Jose Ronildo, Alves Ana Paula Negreiros Nunes, Leitão Lotif Mara Assef, Sotto-Maior Bruno Salles, Dantas Thereza Cristina Farias Botelho, Rodrigues Luciane Lacerda Franco Rocha, Francischone Carlos Eduardo
São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, São Paulo, Brazil.
Dentistry and Nursing School, Federal University of Ceara, Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil.
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2022 Jun 2;2022:4577148. doi: 10.1155/2022/4577148. eCollection 2022.
Considering oral rehabilitation with dental implants, many studies have aimed at improving bone regeneration through the use of biomaterials.
This study aimed at comparing bone neoformation in patients undergoing bilateral maxillary sinus surgery with two bovine biomaterials.
This is a randomized, blinded, clinical crossover, and divided mouth study. Ten participants with an indication of maxillary sinus enlargement were selected and underwent surgical treatment with Bio-Oss® graft biomaterial (graft 1) on one side and Lumina-Porous® graft biomaterial (graft 2) on the other. The samples were collected after nine months and fixed and then decalcified in 10% ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) solution for 30 days to process and make histological slides. Connective and bone tissue were further analyzed to identify the amount of newly formed bone.
The graft 1 group had a greater formation of vital mineralized tissue when compared to the graft 2 group ( = 0.01). For nonvital mineralized tissue and amount of connective tissue, there was no statistical difference ( = 0.21 and = 0.09, respectively). The medullary spaces were larger in the graft 2 group. The group treated with graft 1 presented a higher percentage of osteoclasts and viable osteocytes compared to the graft 2 group ( = 0.014 and = 0.027, respectively).
Every day, new alternative biomaterials are offered as an option in oral rehabilitation. In this study, both treatments induced bone neoformation after 9 months; however, the group treated with Bio-Oss® showed a higher percentage of vital mineralized bone tissue.
考虑到牙种植体的口腔修复，许多研究旨在通过使用生物材料来改善骨再生。
本研究旨在比较接受双侧上颌窦手术的患者使用两种牛生物材料后的骨新生情况。
这是一项随机、双盲、临床交叉和分口研究。选择10名有上颌窦扩大指征的参与者，一侧接受Bio-Oss®移植生物材料（移植1）手术治疗，另一侧接受Lumina-Porous®移植生物材料（移植2）手术治疗。9个月后采集样本并固定，然后在10%乙二胺四乙酸（EDTA）溶液中脱钙30天，以进行处理并制作组织学切片。进一步分析结缔组织和骨组织，以确定新形成骨的量。
与移植2组相比，移植1组有更多的活性矿化组织形成（P = 0.01）。对于无活性矿化组织和结缔组织量，无统计学差异（分别为P = 0.21和P = 0.09）。移植2组的骨髓腔更大。与移植2组相比，移植1组治疗的组中破骨细胞和存活骨细胞的百分比更高（分别为P = 0.014和P = 0.027）。
每天都有新的替代生物材料作为口腔修复的选择被提供。在本研究中，两种治疗在9个月后均诱导了骨新生；然而，使用Bio-Oss®治疗的组显示活性矿化骨组织的百分比更高。
