Open AccessEVALUATION OF MINERALIZED PLASMATIC MATRIX DURING SINUS LIFT WITH THE SIMULTANEOUS PLACEMENT OF DENTAL IMPLANTS
Author(s) -
Hisham M.S. El Eryani,
Sally A.S. El Sayed,
Hamdy Marzook,
Abdel Monem T. Gad Allah
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
international journal of advanced research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2320-5407
DOI - 10.21474/ijar01/13711
Subject(s) - sinus lift , medicine , dentistry , sinus (botany) , implant , bone grafting , maxillary sinus , dental implant , platelet rich fibrin , significant difference , orthodontics , fibrin , surgery , botany , immunology , biology , genus
Objectives:Mineralized plasmatic matrix is reported to improve the quality of the bone/fibrin mixture, creating a stable and easy to handle homogeneous material. However, few studies evaluate the use of the mineralized plasmatic matrix during sinus lift with the simultaneous placement of dental implants. Purpose: This study evaluated the efficiency or not of MPM compared to the xenograft bone grafting in the maxillary sinus lift. Patients and methods:This study was conducted randomly on patients selected for treatment with a total of sixteen lateral windows sinus lift with simultaneous implant placement. Their ages ranged between 20 and 60 years old. Participating patients were divided into two groups equally and randomly The control group: eightsinus floor elevation was performed using simultaneous implant placement. As a grafting material, Xenograft was used. The study group: eight Sinus floor elevation was achieved with simultaneous implant placement. Xenograft has been used in the form of MPM as a grafting material. CBCT taken before and after sinus augmentation to measure bone volume and height after 1 week of baseline (T0), after 6 months (T1), and after 12 months of baseline (T0) (T2). The Osstell(PT) was used for assessment implant stability at implant insertion (PT0) as well as for loading visit (PT1). Result:A significant difference was observed between the two groups in bone volume (p=0.049). No significant difference was observed between the two groups (p=0.129) in height of graft. Conclusion:MPM eliminated the need for barrier membranes when a guided bone regeneration procedure is considered.The useofMPM as a grafting bone offered greater graft stability and handling.