Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Aug;52(4):325-337.
doi: 10.5051/jpis.2105560278.

Effect of the size of the bony access window and the collagen barrier over the window in sinus floor elevation: a preclinical investigation in a rabbit sinus model

Jeong-Eun Sim  1 , Sangyup Kim  1 , Ji-Youn Hong  2   3 , Seung-Il Shin  2   3 , Jong-Hyuk Chung  2   4 , Hyun-Chang Lim  2   5
Affiliations

Effect of the size of the bony access window and the collagen barrier over the window in sinus floor elevation: a preclinical investigation in a rabbit sinus model

Jeong-Eun Sim et al. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2022 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of (1) the size of the bony access window and (2) collagen membrane coverage over the window in sinus floor elevation in a rabbit sinus model.

Methods: Small bony access windows (SW; ø 2.8 mm) were made in 6 rabbits and large windows (LW; ø 6 mm) in 6 other rabbits. Both sinuses in each rabbit were allocated to groups with or without coverage of a collagen membrane (CM) on the window, resulting in 4 groups: SW, LW, SW+CM, and LW+CM. After 4 weeks of healing, micro-computed tomographic, histologic, and histomorphometric analyses were performed.

Results: Bony healing in the window area was incomplete in all groups, but most bone graft particles were well confined in the augmented cavity. Histologically, the pattern of new bone formation was similar in all groups. Histomorphometrically, the percentage of newly formed bone was greater in the groups with CM than in the groups without CM, and in the groups with SW than in the groups with LW (12.92%±6.40% in the SW+CM group, 4.21%±7.73% in the SW group, 10.45%±4.81% in the LW+CM group, 11.77%±3.83% in the LW group). The above differences were not statistically significant (P>0.05).

Conclusions: The combination of a small bony access window and the use of a collagen membrane over the window favored new bone formation compared to other groups, but this result should be further investigated due to the limitations of the present animal model.

Keywords: Animal model; Bone regeneration; Sinus floor augmentation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article has been reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Clinical photographs of surgery. (A, C) Preparation of the bony access window (SW=ø 2.8 mm, LW=ø 6 mm); (B, D) insertion of the substitute bone material and placement of the collagen barrier membrane on 1 side of the access window.
SW: small access window, LW: large access window.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Representative reconstructed images from micro-computed tomography.
SW: small access window, CM: collagen membrane, LW: large access window.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Representative histologic views of the groups with SW. (A-D) SW group; (E-H) SW+CM group; (A, E) total augmentation; (B, F) region of interest close to the surgical access window; (C, G) region of interest at the center of augmentation; (D, H) region of interest close to the sinus membrane.
SW: small access window, CM: collagen membrane.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Representative histologic views of the groups with LW. (A-D) LW group; (E-H) LW+CM group; (A, E) total augmentation; (B, F) region of interest close to the surgical access window; (C, G) region of interest at the center of augmentation; (D, H) region of interest close to the sinus membrane.
LW: large access window, CM: collagen membrane.
Figure 5
Figure 5. Box and whisker plots of histomorphometric measurements. (A) Total augmented area (mm2); (B) percentage of newly formed bone (%); (C) percentage of residual substitute bone material (%).
SW: small access window, CM: collagen membrane, LW: large access window, TA: area of total augmentation surrounded by medial/lateral bony walls, the Schneiderian membrane, and the surgical access window, NB: percentage of newly formed bone within the TA, RM: percentage of residual bone substitute material within the TA.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M. Methods to treat the edentulous posterior maxilla: implants with sinus grafting. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:867–871. - PubMed
    1. Chao YL, Chen HH, Mei CC, Tu YK, Lu HK. Meta-regression analysis of the initial bone height for predicting implant survival rates of two sinus elevation procedures. J Clin Periodontol. 2010;37:456–465. - PubMed
    1. 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. - PubMed
    1. Pjetursson BE, Tan WC, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35(Suppl):216–240. - PubMed
    1. Duttenhoefer F, Souren C, Menne D, Emmerich D, Schön R, Sauerbier S. Long-term survival of dental implants placed in the grafted maxillary sinus: systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment modalities. PLoS One. 2013;8:e75357. - PMC - PubMed