Endo-sinus Bone Formation after Transalveolar Sinus Floor Elevation Without Grafting with Simultaneous Implant Placement: Histological and Histomorphometric Assessment in a Dog Model

Shu-jiao Qian,Jia-ji Mo,Jun-yu Shi,Ying-xin Gu,Mi-si Si,Hong-chang Lai
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12975
2018-01-01
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Abstract:AimTo evaluate endo-sinus new bone formation and implant osseointegration after transalveolar sinus floor elevation (TSFE) and simultaneous implant placement without any grafting materials and to investigate the influence of implant surface modification on bone healing process under this circumstance. Materials and methodsTransalveolar sinus floor elevation and simultaneous implant placement were conducted bilaterally on 12 Labrador dogs. No grafting materials were used during surgery. Implants with two different surfaces (SLA and SLActive) were placed in a split-mouth design. The animals were sacrificed 4, 8 and 24weeks after surgery for histological and histomorphometric assessments. Bone-to-implant contact (BIC%), alveolar bone height (ABH) and the percentages of mineralized bone (MB%) in the area of interest were analysed. The probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were also assessed to describe peri-implant health conditions. ResultsSprouts of new bone in direct contact with implant surface were seen in the elevated area at every time point. Newly formed woven bone under sinus membrane was visible. SLActive implants exhibited favourable results compared with SLA implants regarding ABH at 4weeks and BIC% at 4 and 8weeks. Sites with BOP positive could be observed in both groups at any time point. No newly formed bone can be found on the implant apex with either SLA or SLActive surfaces at any time point. ConclusionsSpontaneous new bone formation from the parent bone walls could be observed after TFE without any grafting materials. No clear evidence of bone formation from the Schneiderian membrane could be found. Even though there were trends for quicker bone response of SLActive implants, this study failed to show the absolute advantage of SLActive in achieving endo-sinus bone formation.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?