Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지

A cumulative survival rate of implants installed on posterior maxilla augmented using MBCP after 2 years of loading: A retrospective clinical study

MBCP를 이용하여 거상된 상악 구치부에 식립한 임플란트의 기능 후 2년 누적 생존율 - 후향적 임상 연구

  • Kim, Min-Soo (Department of Periodontology, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Lee, Ji-Hyun (Department of Periodontology, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Jung, Ui-Won (Department of Periodontology, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Chang-Sung (Department of Periodontology, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Choi, Seong-Ho (Department of Periodontology, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Cho, Kyoo-Sung (Department of Periodontology, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
  • 김민수 (연세대학교 치과대학 치주과학교실) ;
  • 이지현 (연세대학교 치과대학 치주과학교실) ;
  • 정의원 (연세대학교 치과대학 치주과학교실) ;
  • 김창성 (연세대학교 치과대학 치주과학교실) ;
  • 최성호 (연세대학교 치과대학 치주과학교실) ;
  • 조규성 (연세대학교 치과대학 치주과학교실)
  • Published : 2008.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate 2 years cumulative survival rate of implants on augmented sinus area using MBCP, mixture of MBCP and ICB, and mixture of MBCP and autogenous bone by means of clinical and radiologic methods. Materials and Methods: In a total of 37 patients, 41 maxillary sinuses were augmented and 89 implant fixtures were installed simultaneously or after a regular healing period. The patients were divided in 3 groups: MBCP only, MBCP combined with ICB, MBCP combined with autogenous bone. After delivery of prosthesis, along 2 years of observation period, all implants were evaluated clinically and radiologically. And the results were as follows. Results: The results of this study were as follows. 1. A 2 year cumulative survival rate of implants placed with sinus augmentation procedure using MBCP was 97.75%. 2. Survival rate of implants using MBCP only was 97.62%, MBCP and ICB was 100%, MBCP and autogenous bone was 95%. There was no statistically significant difference between 3 groups. 3. Only 2 of 89 implants were lost before delivery of prosthesis, so it can be regarded as an early failure. And both were successfully restored by wider implants. Conclusion: It can be suggested that MBCP may have predictable result when used as a grafting material of sinus floor augmentation whether combined with other graft(ICB, autogenous bone) or not. And the diameter, length, location of implants did not have a significant effect on 2 year cumulative survival rate.

Keywords

References

  1. Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980;38: 613-616
  2. Timmenga NM, Raghoebar GM, Boering G, van Weissenbruch R. Maxillary sinus function after sinus lifts for the insertion of dental implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;55:936-939;discussion 940 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90063-X
  3. Khoury F. Augmentation of the sinus floor with mandibular bone block and simultaneous implantation: a 6-year clinical investigation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:557-564
  4. Raghoebar GM, Timmenga NM, Reintsema H, et al. Maxillary bone grafting for insertion of endosseous implants: results after 12-124 months. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:279-286 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012003279.x
  5. Wallace SS, Froum SJ. Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systematic review. Ann Periodontol 2003;8:328-343 https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2003.8.1.328
  6. Hallman M, Sennerby L, Lundgren S. A clinical and histologic evaluation of implant integration in the posterior maxilla after sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone, bovine hydroxyapatite, or a 20:80 mixture. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:635-643
  7. van den Bergh JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Krekeler G, Tuinzing DB. Maxillary sinusfloor elevation and grafting with human demineralized freeze dried bone. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:487-493 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011005487.x
  8. Schwartz Z, Goldstein M, Raviv E, et al. Clinical evaluation of demineralized bone allograft in a hyaluronic acid carrier for sinus lift augmentation in humans: a computed tomography and histomorphometric study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:204-211 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01303.x
  9. Daculsi G, LeGeros RZ, Nery E, et al. Transformation of biphasic calcium phosphate ceramics in vivo: ultrastructural and physicochemical characterization. J Biomed Mater Res 1989;23:883-894 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820230806
  10. Karabuda C, Ozdemir O, Tosun T, et al. Histological and clinical evaluation of 3 different grafting materials for sinus lifting procedure based on 8 cases. J Periodontol 2001;72: 1436-1442 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1436
  11. Gauthier O, Bouler JM, Aguado E, et al. Macroporous biphasic calcium phosphate ceramics: influence of macropore diameter and macroporosity percentage on bone ingrowth. Biomaterials 1998;19:133-139 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(97)00180-4
  12. Nery EB, LeGeros RZ, Lynch KL, Lee K. Tissue response to biphasic calcium phosphate ceramic with different ratios of HA/beta TCP in periodontal osseous defects. J Periodontol 1992;63:729-735 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1992.63.9.729
  13. Yamada S, Heymann D, Bouler JM, Daculsi G. Osteoclastic resorption of biphasic calcium phosphate ceramic in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res 1997;37:346-352 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(19971205)37:3<346::AID-JBM5>3.0.CO;2-L
  14. Klein CP, Driessen AA, de Groot K, van den Hooff A. Biodegradation behavior of various calcium phosphate materials in bone tissue. J Biomed Mater Res 1983;17: 769-784 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820170505
  15. Zitzmann NU, Scharer P. Sinus elevation procedures in the resorbed posterior maxilla. Comparison of the crestal and lateral approaches. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998;85:8-17 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(98)90391-2
  16. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-172 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x
  17. Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Bruggenkate CM, et al. The use of reduced healing times on ITI implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: early results from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:144-153 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130204.x
  18. Tolstunov L. Dental implant success-failure analysis: a concept of implant vulnerability. Implant Dent 2006;15: 341-346 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.id.0000239333.24384.5d
  19. Weber HP, Crohin CC, Fiorellini JP. A 5-year prospective clinical and radiographic study of non-submerged dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:144-153 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.110207.x
  20. Leonhardt A, Grondahl K, Bergstrom C, Lekholm U. Long-term follow-up of osseointegrated titanium implants using clinical, radiographic and microbiological parameters. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:127-132 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130202.x
  21. Misch CE. Maxillary sinus augmentation for endosteal implants: organized alternative treatment plans. Int J Oral Implantol 1987;4:49-58
  22. Jemt T, Lekholm U. Implant treatment in edentulous maxillae: a 5-year follow-up report on patients with different degrees of jaw resorption. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:303-311
  23. Jensen OT, Shulman LB, Block MS, Iacono VJ. Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13 Suppl:11-45
  24. Summers RB. A new concept in maxillary implant surgery: the osteotome technique. Compendium 1994;15:152, 154-156, 158 passim; quiz 162
  25. Blomqvist JE, Alberius P, Isaksson S. Retrospective analysis of one-stage maxillary sinus augmentation with endosseous implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11: 512-521
  26. Block MS, Kent JN. Sinus augmentation for dental implants: the use of autogenous bone. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;55:1281-1286 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90185-3
  27. Burchardt H. The biology of bone graft repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1983:28-42
  28. Froum SJ, Wallace SS, Elian N, et al. Comparison of mineralized cancellous bone allograft (Puros) and anorganic bovine bone matrix (Bio-Oss) for sinus augmentation: histomorphometry at 26 to 32 weeks after grafting. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006;26:543-551
  29. Hatano N, Shimizu Y, Ooya K. A clinical long-term radiographic evaluation of graft height changes after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with a 2:1 autogenous bone/xenograft mixture and simultaneous placement of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:339-345 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00996.x
  30. Johansson B, Grepe A, Wannfors K, Hirsch JM. A clinical study of changes in the volume of bone grafts in the atrophic maxilla. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001;30:157-161 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600601
  31. Kim JS, Lee SK, Chae GJ, et al. A radiographic evaluation of graft height changes after maxillary sinus augmentation and placement of dental implants. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2007;37:277-286 https://doi.org/10.5051/jkape.2007.37.2.277
  32. Lee JH, Jung UW, KIM CS, et al. Maxillary sinus augmentation using macroporous biphasic calcium phosphate (MBCP) : Three case report with histologic evaluation. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2006;36:567-577 https://doi.org/10.5051/jkape.2006.36.2.567
  33. Renouard F, Nisand D. Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17 Suppl 2:35-51 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01349.x
  34. Zarb GA, Zarb FL. Tissue integrated dental prostheses. Quintessence Int 1985;16:39-42
  35. Tawil G, Younan R. Clinical evaluation of short, machined-surface implants followed for 12 to 92 months. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:894-901
  36. Fugazzotto PA, Beagle JR, Ganeles J, et al. Success and failure rates of 9 mm or shorter implants in the replacement of missing maxillary molars when restored with individual crowns: preliminary results 0 to 84 months in function. A retrospective study. J Periodontol 2004;75: 327-332 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2004.75.2.327
  37. Renouard F, Nisand D. Short implants in the severely resorbed maxilla: a 2-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7 Suppl 1:S104-110 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00082.x
  38. Ivanoff CJ, Grondahl K, Sennerby L, et al. Influence of variations in implant diameters: a 3- to 5-year retrospective clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14: 173-180
  39. Mordenfeld MH, Johansson A, Hedin M, et al. A retrospective clinical study of wide-diameter implants used in posterior edentulous areas. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:387-392
  40. Eckert SE, Meraw SJ, Weaver AL, Lohse CM. Early experience with Wide-Platform Mk II implants. Part I: Implant survival. Part II: Evaluation of risk factors involving implant survival. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16: 208-216
  41. Shin SW, Bryant SR, Zarb GA. A retrospective study on the treatment outcome of wide-bodied implants. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:52-58.
  42. Yon JY, Chae GJ, Jung UW, et al. Long-term evaluation of implant placed in sites grafted by lateral window approach on maxillary sinus; a 10-year retrospective study. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2007;37:691-704 https://doi.org/10.5051/jkape.2007.37.4.691