English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Objectives  Synthetic biphasic calcium phosphate ( BCP ) with a hydroxyapatite/ß‐tricalcium phosphate ( HA /ß‐ TCP ) ratio of 60/40 ( BCP 60/40) is successfully used as alternative for autologous bone in patients undergoing maxillary sinus floor elevation ( MSFE ) for dental implant placement. A high percentage of  HA  in  BCP 60/40 may hamper efficient scaffold remodeling. Osteogenesis and neovascularization are pivotal in effective bone regeneration. We aimed to investigate whether differences exist in osteogenic and/or vasculogenic potential of  BCP 60/40 and  BCP 20/80 in patients undergoing  MSFE .    Materials and methods  Twenty patients undergoing  MSFE  were treated with  BCP 60/40 ( n  = 10) or  BCP 20/80 ( n  = 10). Bone and graft volumes were determined by micro‐computed tomography and histomorphometrical analysis of biopsies of the augmented region. Osteoid volumes, number of osteoclasts, and blood vessels were determined by histomorphometrical analysis. The biopsies were taken 6.5 months (26 weeks) postoperatively prior to dental implant placement.    Results  Bone and osteoid volumes were 9.7% and 0.8% higher at the most cranial side of the  BCP 20/80 biopsies compared to the  BCP 60/40 biopsies. Graft volumes, number of osteoclasts, and blood vessels were similar in both groups.    Conclusions   BCP 20/80 showed enhanced osteogenic potential in patients undergoing  MSFE  compared to  BCP 60/40, due to either a faster bone remodeling rate or an earlier start of bone formation in  BCP 20/80‐treated patients, suggesting that a higher  TCP  content positively contributes to the bone remodeling rate. Therefore,  BCP 20/80 might perform better, at least in the short term, as a scaffold for bone augmentation in the  MSFE  model than  BCP 60/40 as more bone is formed, and more osteoid is deposited at the cranial side in  BCP 20/80‐treated patients compared to  BCP 60/40‐treated patients. However, catch‐up of  BCP 60/40 in the long term cannot be ruled out.

Evaluation of a new biphasic calcium phosphate for maxillary sinus floor elevation: Micro‐CT and histomorphometrical analyses