PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15170286

Tissue-engineered bone for maxillary sinus augmentation.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Autologous, allogenic, and alloplastic materials for bony reconstruction in the craniomaxillofacial region have specific drawbacks stimulating the ongoing search for new materials. Cultivated skin and mucosa grafts are in clinical routine use in head and neck reconstruction but so far, to the best of our knowledge, no successful clinical application has been described of periosteum-derived tissue-engineered bone for augmentation of the edentulous posterior maxilla. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a clinical study, augmentation of the posterior maxilla was carried out using a bone matrix derived from mandibular periosteum cells on an Ethisorb (Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany) fleece. In this report, we show the fabrication of the matrix, clinical application, and results in 27 patients. RESULTS: In 18 patients, an excellent clinical, radiologic, and histologic result could be proved 3 months after augmentation. Histologically, the bone biopsy samples from these patients revealed mineralized trabecular bone with remnants of the biomaterial. An unsuccessful result was found in 8 cases with a more extended augmentation procedure. The clinical inspection 3 months after augmentation showed almost no formation of new bone. In contrast, a replacement resorption with connective tissue was found. This may be the result of failure of the initial supply of the cells embedded within large cell-polymer constructs with sufficient oxygen and nutrients to sustain their survival and proliferation and allow for the integration of the developing tissue within the surrounding tissue. CONCLUSION: Our achieved results suggest that periosteum-derived osteoblasts on a suitable matrix can form lamellar bone within 3 months after transplantation and provide a reliable basis for simultaneous or secondary insertion of dental implants.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ronald Schimming, Rainer Schmelzeisen. 2004. Tissue-engineered bone for maxillary sinus augmentation.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2004.01.009

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Surgical skills.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Alveolar Ridge Augmentation↗

[Sinus floor elevation and augmentation. Evidence-based analysis of prognosis and risk factors].

AIM: It was the aim of this investigation to analyze evidence of prognosis, predictors, and risk factors concerning sinus floor elevation and augmentation (SFEA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A MEDLINE search was performed to analyze the literature published between 1990 and 2002, limited to keywords ("sinus floor elevation and dental implants", "complications", "success"), study type (randomized as well as clinical prospective studies, retrospective studies, reviews), and language (German or English). RESULTS: Of 229 publications identified, 72 met the inclusion criteria (22 prospective and 47 retrospective studies, 3 reviews). Considering the augmentation material [autogenous bone (AB), bone substitution materials (BSM), and combinations of AB and BSM], the frequency of implant loss was not significantly different (AB 8%, BSM 9%, AB + BSM 5%, p>0.09) after an observation period of 2-4 years. The average duration of the healing period was 6 months (AB) and 8 months (BSM) with simultaneous SFEA and implantation and 6-7 months (AB and BSM) for the staged approach after an average healing period of 6 months for the augmentation materials. Frequency of implant loss was not different between simultaneous and staged approaches (7-8%). Postoperative sinusitis occurred in 3-8% of the cases. Smoking, positive sinusitis history, obstructive pathoses of the nose and ostium, allergic rhino-pathoses, use of short implants (<13 mm), treatment of edentulous maxilla compared to partially edentulous maxilla, bruxism, and uncontrolled early loading of implants were identified as predictors for complications. CONCLUSIONS: Presupposing proper consideration of indications, SFEA should be considered as an evidence-based and clinically established method for implant prosthetic rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla with an overall cumulative survival rate of 90% within an average observation period of 4 years.

Alveolar Ridge Augmentation↗