- 1、本文档共9页,可阅读全部内容。
- 2、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。
- 3、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载。
- 4、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
查看更多
上颌窦提升中采用刮骨器或环钻取自体骨的组织学比较
Histologic and Radiographic Comparison of
Bone Scraper and Trephine Bur for Autologous
Bone Harvesting in Maxillary Sinus Augmentation
1 2 3
Paolo Maridati, DDS, PhD /Claudia Dellavia, DDS, PhD /Gaia Pellegrini, DDS, PhD /
3 4 5
Elena Canciani, MSc /Andrea Maragno, DDS /Carlo Maiorana, MD, DDS
Purpose: The aims of this study were to investigate the best two of five common methods of collecting
autologous bone (preliminary study [PS]) and to test clinically the effects of autografts harvested using a
trephine bur or bone scraper for sinus augmentation surgery (main study [MS]). Materials and Methods:
In the PS, five autograft samples from five patients (n = 25) were harvested with a bone scraper, round bur,
piezoelectric device, implant bur, and trephine bur and were processed for histomorphometric analysis. In the
MS, sinus augmentation was performed on 20 patients using bovine-derived bone substitute and autograft
collected with a trephine bur (group A, n = 10) or collected with a bone scraper (group B, n = 10). Narrow
implants were also placed. At 6 months, changes in graft volume were evaluated with cone beam computed
tomography. The amounts of regenerated bone, residual graft, and osseointegration of the implants were
assessed histologically. Results: In the PS, the trephine bur and bone scraper harvested bone chips that
were medium to large and more vital than those obtained with the other tools. In the MS, no significant
differences were seen between groups in terms of the amount of residual biomaterial, rege
文档评论(0)