Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32372226›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2020

Comparison of two anorganic bovine bone in maxillary sinus lift: a split-mouth study with clinical, radiographical, and histomorphometrical analysis.

Heitor Fontes da Silva, Douglas Rangel Goulart, Alexander Tadeu Sverzut, Sergio Olate, Márcio de Moraes

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Heitor Fontes da SilvaDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, Campinas State University Unicamp, Av. Limeira, 901, Areiao, Piracicaba, São Paulo, 13414-903, Brazil.
Douglas Rangel GoulartDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, Campinas State University Unicamp, Av. Limeira, 901, Areiao, Piracicaba, São Paulo, 13414-903, Brazil. douglasrgoulart@gmail.com.
Alexander Tadeu SverzutDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, Campinas State University-Unicamp, São Paulo, Brazil.
Sergio OlateDepartment of Oral, Facial and Maxillofacial Surgery and Center of Excellence in Surgical and Morphological Studies, University of La Frontera, Temuco, Chile.
Márcio de MoraesDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, Campinas State University-Unicamp, São Paulo, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversidad de La Frontera · CL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss®) has been extensively used for reconstruction of posterior area of maxilla in sinus lift procedure; however, a new graft material (Lumina-Bone Porous®), that has a different manufacturing process, has not been yet compared in clinical and histological terms. The manufacturing process of bovine bone graft is related to size and porosity of the particles, and this can change osteoconductive property of the material and bone formation. The use of Lumina-Porus® could improve bone formation, reduce the remaining particles of the biomaterial using a low-cost material. The aim of this research was to compare the clinical, radiological, and histomorphometrical results from maxillary sinus lift with two different anorganic bovine bone substitutes Bio-Oss® (control) and Lumina-Bone Porous® (test).

resultsA split-mouth study was performed with 13 volunteers. The mean bone ridge height in the deepest portion of maxillary sinuses floor was 3.11 ± 0.83 mm in the Bio-Oss® and 2.38 ± 0.75 mm in the Lumina-Bone Porous®. After sinus lift, the Bio-Oss® group shows bone ridge height of 11.56 ± 2.03 mm and Lumina-Bone® of 10.62 ± 1.93 mm. The increase in alveolar bone height scores was significant between pre-augmentation and 6 months after SL in both groups (p < 0.001). No statistical significant difference in newly formed bone in the Bio-Oss® group (20.4 ± 5.4%), and Lumina-Bone Porous® (22.8 ± 8.5%) was histomorphological observed (p > 0.05). On the other hand, the residual graft particles showed significant difference between the Bio-Oss® group (19.9 ± 8.6%) and Lumina-Bone Porous® (14.6 ± 5.6%) (p < 0.05). The survival rate of dental implants for augmented area with Lumina Bone Porous® was 88.88%, while for Bio-Oss® group was 100%.

conclusionBoth materials Bio-Oss® and Lumina-Bone Porous® can be used in the maxillary sinus floor augmentation with good predictability in clinical, radiographical, and histological point of view.

Indexed as

Anorganic bovine boneBone graftingClinical trialDental implantsMaxillary sinusSinus floor elevation

Identifiers

PMID32372226
PMCPMC7200963
OpenAlexW3022297206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.