It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Aim
To study the influence on the healing of the placement of particulate autogenous bone in the antrostomy and in the subjacent region after maxillary sinus elevation.
Material and methods
Sixteen New Zealand rabbits were undergone to bilateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation with 4 × 4 mm antrostomy dimension. The sinus mucosa was elevated, and the space obtained was filled with xenograft. In the test site (treated sites), autogenous bone was harvested from the tibia and was placed either in the antrostomy and the subjacent region while the control site was left untreated. Antrostomy was covered bilaterally with collagen membranes. Animals were euthanized after 1 and 8 weeks of healing, with 8 rabbits in each group. Histomorphometric evaluations were done. The Wilcoxon test is used for statistical analysis, for a 5% statistical significance.
Results
After 1 week of healing, the new bone proportion in the antrostomy was 7.7 ± 11.2% and 6.1 ± 6.4% in the treated and untreated sites, respectively. In the subjacent region (close-to-window region), hardly any new bone was assessed. In the elevated region, 2.7–2.8% of total new bone was found in both sites. In the antrostomy region, after 8 weeks of healing, 35.5 ± 20.9% of new bone in the treated sites, and 28.6 ± 24.1% in the untreated sites was observed (p = 0.499). In the close-to-window region, the respective proportions were 25.8 ± 16.1% and 17.6 ± 16.3% (p = 0.018). In the elevated region, the total new bone reached fractions of 27.9 ± 12.9% and 23.6 ± 15.2% in the treated and untreated sites, respectively (p = 0.128).
Conclusions
The placement of autogenous bone in the antrostomy and the subjacent region after maxillary sinus elevation, slightly enhanced bone formation compared with sites only grafted with xenograft. Though, only the subjacent close-to-window region showed a statistical significance at 8 weeks of healing. Despite the limitations of the present study, due to its preclinical nature, findings should be extrapolated to humans with caution.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Private practice, London, UK
2 University of Valencia, Oral Surgery Unit. Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Clinica Odontológica, Valencia, Spain (GRID:grid.5338.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 2173 938X)
3 University of Valencia, Department of Pathology and Health Research Institute of the Hospital Clínico (INCLIVA), Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Valencia, Spain (GRID:grid.5338.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 2173 938X); Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Ciber-BBN, Valencia, Spain (GRID:grid.413448.e) (ISNI:0000 0000 9314 1427)
4 University of Valencia, Department of Pathology and Health Research Institute of the Hospital Clínico (INCLIVA), Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Valencia, Spain (GRID:grid.5338.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 2173 938X)
5 ARDEC Academy, Rimini, Italy (GRID:grid.5338.d)