Autogenous Bone Graft Versus Distraction Osteogenesis for Maxillary Augmentation an Histological Analysis
L.A.V. Pereira,M.M. Soares,F. Guerra,A. Safady,V. de Souza Pinto
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0901-5027(05)81296-2
2005-01-01
Abstract:Statement of the ProblemSince the introduction of osseointegrated implants, the use of autogenous bone graft has been widely reported as the best choice for reconstruction of atrophied alveolar bone. However with the introduction of distraction osteogenesis for alveolar augmentation, several authors have described good results using distraction osteogenesis. The aim of this paper is to compare the use of distraction osteogenesis with autogenous bone graft on the rehabilitation of atrophied anterior maxilla.Materials and MethodsTo this study biopsies were collected on two groups of four patients (graft group) submitted to autogenous bone graft (donor site mandibular ramus), and ten patients submitted to distraction osteogenesis (do group). On the graft group the biopsies were collected from patients with successful integration of the graft during the implant installation surgery, showing an average of ten months after the graft procedureMethod of Data AnalysisTo the do group, the biopsies were collected during the removal of the device and implant installation procedure, showing an average time of 4 months. On all the patients, a control biopsy was collected from the native bone. After the removal of the sample, the material was submitted to the hematoxilin-eosin and Sirius-Red staining colloration. The speciments were analysed by ligth microscopy with a magnification of 400X an 800x.ResultsThe histological analyses of the graft group showed an integrated graft with the absence of inflammatory cells and approximately half of the bone trabecula showed empty lacuna. New woven bone was observed in areas of bone remodeling. In the Sirius-Red staining on polarized microscopy, new woven bone showed few and unorganized collagen fibers. The histological analyses of the do group showed a partially matured lamellar new bone with intensive proliferation of endosteal osteogenic cells in a well vascularized tissue. The Sirius-Red staining showed a large amount of collagen fibres, organized on the direction of the vector of forces of the lengthening.ConclusionAlthough this study has a small group, the histology support some clinical studies reporting that the distraction osteogenesis is superior to the bone graft on the reconstruction of the compromised alveolar maxillary bone. Statement of the ProblemSince the introduction of osseointegrated implants, the use of autogenous bone graft has been widely reported as the best choice for reconstruction of atrophied alveolar bone. However with the introduction of distraction osteogenesis for alveolar augmentation, several authors have described good results using distraction osteogenesis. The aim of this paper is to compare the use of distraction osteogenesis with autogenous bone graft on the rehabilitation of atrophied anterior maxilla. Since the introduction of osseointegrated implants, the use of autogenous bone graft has been widely reported as the best choice for reconstruction of atrophied alveolar bone. However with the introduction of distraction osteogenesis for alveolar augmentation, several authors have described good results using distraction osteogenesis. The aim of this paper is to compare the use of distraction osteogenesis with autogenous bone graft on the rehabilitation of atrophied anterior maxilla. Materials and MethodsTo this study biopsies were collected on two groups of four patients (graft group) submitted to autogenous bone graft (donor site mandibular ramus), and ten patients submitted to distraction osteogenesis (do group). On the graft group the biopsies were collected from patients with successful integration of the graft during the implant installation surgery, showing an average of ten months after the graft procedure To this study biopsies were collected on two groups of four patients (graft group) submitted to autogenous bone graft (donor site mandibular ramus), and ten patients submitted to distraction osteogenesis (do group). On the graft group the biopsies were collected from patients with successful integration of the graft during the implant installation surgery, showing an average of ten months after the graft procedure Method of Data AnalysisTo the do group, the biopsies were collected during the removal of the device and implant installation procedure, showing an average time of 4 months. On all the patients, a control biopsy was collected from the native bone. After the removal of the sample, the material was submitted to the hematoxilin-eosin and Sirius-Red staining colloration. The speciments were analysed by ligth microscopy with a magnification of 400X an 800x. To the do group, the biopsies were collected during the removal of the device and implant installation procedure, showing an average time of 4 months. On all the patients, a control biopsy was collected from the native bone. After the removal of the sample, the material was submitted to the hematoxilin-eosin and Sirius-Red staining colloration. The speciments were analysed by ligth microscopy with a magnification of 400X an 800x. ResultsThe histological analyses of the graft group showed an integrated graft with the absence of inflammatory cells and approximately half of the bone trabecula showed empty lacuna. New woven bone was observed in areas of bone remodeling. In the Sirius-Red staining on polarized microscopy, new woven bone showed few and unorganized collagen fibers. The histological analyses of the do group showed a partially matured lamellar new bone with intensive proliferation of endosteal osteogenic cells in a well vascularized tissue. The Sirius-Red staining showed a large amount of collagen fibres, organized on the direction of the vector of forces of the lengthening. The histological analyses of the graft group showed an integrated graft with the absence of inflammatory cells and approximately half of the bone trabecula showed empty lacuna. New woven bone was observed in areas of bone remodeling. In the Sirius-Red staining on polarized microscopy, new woven bone showed few and unorganized collagen fibers. The histological analyses of the do group showed a partially matured lamellar new bone with intensive proliferation of endosteal osteogenic cells in a well vascularized tissue. The Sirius-Red staining showed a large amount of collagen fibres, organized on the direction of the vector of forces of the lengthening. ConclusionAlthough this study has a small group, the histology support some clinical studies reporting that the distraction osteogenesis is superior to the bone graft on the reconstruction of the compromised alveolar maxillary bone. Although this study has a small group, the histology support some clinical studies reporting that the distraction osteogenesis is superior to the bone graft on the reconstruction of the compromised alveolar maxillary bone.