Dental caries and periodontal disease are the major causes for tooth loss. While dental caries commonly involve the posterior teeth in both jaws, the teeth most commonly lost due to periodontal problems are the first and second molars in the maxilla. As a consequence, the upper posterior jaw is frequently edentulous. Implant therapy today is a predictable treatment modality for prosthetic reconstruction of edentulous patient. Insufficient amounts of bone, due to atrophy following loss of teeth or due to the presence of the maxillary sinus, can make it impossible to insert implants in the posterior maxilla. During the 1970s and 1980s, Tatum, Boyne and James and Wood and Moore first described maxillary sinus floor augmentation whereby, after the creation of a lateral access point, autologous bone grafts are inserted to increase crestal bone height and to create the necessary conditions for the insertion of implants. This surgical procedure requires a two-stage approach and a double surgical site: first, bone is harvested from a donor site and transplanted to the recipient site; then, after a proper healing period of between 4 to 6 months, the implants are inserted. This kind of bone reconstruction, even if well documented, has its limitations, not least in the creation of two different surgical sites and the consequent increased risk of morbidity. In 2004, Lundgren et al. described a new, simplified technique for the elevation of the sinus floor. The authors showed that by lifting the sinus membrane an empty space was created in which blood clot formations resulted in the establishment of new bone. The implants were placed simultaneously to function as “tent poles”, thus maintaining the sinus membrane in a raised position during the subsequent healing period. An essential prerequisite of this technique is to obtain optimal primary implant stability from the residual bone in the sinus floor. An extremely resorbed maxillary sinus floor, with, for example, less than 2-3 mm of poor quality residual bone, could impair implant insertion. The aims of the present research project were (i) to evaluate the donor site morbidity and the acceptance level of patients when a bone graft is harvested from the anterior iliac crest, (ii) to evaluate implant stability, new bone formation inside the maxillary sinus and marginal bone resorption around the implants in long term follow up when maxillary sinus floor augmentation is performed through sinus membrane elevation and without the addition of any grafting material, (iii) to investigate new bone formation inside the maxillary sinus, in experimental design, using a resorbable space-maker device in order to maintain elevation of the sinus membrane where there is too little bone to insert implants with good primary stability. In Paper I, 70 consecutively treated patients were retrospectively evaluated in terms of postoperative donor site morbidity and donor site complications. With regard to donor site morbidity, 74% of patients were free of pain within 3 weeks, whereas 26% had a prolonged period of pain lasting from a few weeks to several months. For 11% of patients there was still some pain or discomfort 2 years after the grafting surgery. Nevertheless, patients acceptance was high and treatment significantly improved oral function, facial appearance, and recreation/social activities and resulted in an overall improvement in the quality of life of formerly edentulous patients. In Paper I and III, some differently shaped space-making devices were tested on primates (tufted capuchin - Cebus apella) in two experimental models aimed at evaluating whether a two-stage procedure for sinus floor augmentation could benefit from the use of a space-making device to increase the bone volume and enable later implant installation with good primary stability, without the use of any grafting material. An histological examination of the specimens showed that it is possible to obtain bone formation in contact with both the Schneiderian membrane and the device. In most cases the device was displaced. The process of bone formation indicated that this technique is potentially useful for two-stage sinus floor augmentation. The lack of device stability within the sinus requires further improvement in space-makers if predictable bone augmentation is to be achieved. In Paper IV, a total of 84 patients were subjected to 96 membrane elevation procedures and the simultaneous placement of 239 implants. Changes of intra-sinus and marginal bone height in relation to the implants were measured in intraoral radiographs carried out during insertion after 6 months of healing, after 6 months of loading and then annually. Computerised tomography was performed pre-surgically and 6 months post-surgically. Resonance frequency analysis measurements were performed at the time of implant placement, at abutment connection and after 6 months of loading. The implant follow-up period ranged from a minimum of one to a maximum of 6 years after implant loading. All implants were stable after 6 months of healing. A total of three implants were lost during the follow-up period giving a survival rate of 98.7%. Radiography demonstrated an average of 5.3 ± 2.1 mm of intra-sinus new bone formation after 6 months of healing. RFA measurements showed adequate primary stability (implant stability quotient 67.4 ± 6.1) and small changes over time. In conclusion, harvesting bone from the iliac crest could result in temporary donor site morbidity, but in 11% of patients pain or discomfort was still present up to 2 years after surgery. However, patient satisfaction was good despite this slow or incomplete recovery, as showed by the quality of life questionnaire. Maxillary sinus membrane elevation without the use of bone grafts or bone substitutes results in predictable bone formation both in animal design, where the sinus membrane is supported by a resorbable device, and in clinical conditions, where the membrane is kept in the upper position by dental implants. This new bone formation is accompanied by a high implant survival rate of 98.7% over a follow-up period of up to 6 years. Intra-sinus bone formation remained stable in the long-term follow-up. It is suggested that the secluded compartment allowed bone formation in accordance with the principle of guided tissue regeneration. This technique reduces the risks of morbidity related to bone graft harvesting and eliminates the costs of grafting materials.

Sammanfattning Syfte: Syftet med denna systematiska litteraturöversikt var att testa hypotesen att det inte är någon skillnad rörande lyckandefrekvensen gällande implantatbehandling vid sinuslyft med olika bentransplantatmaterial Material och metod: Studien baseras på sökningar i PubMed, Cochrane Library och Web of Science i kombination med en manuell granskning av relevanta publikationer. Inkluderade publikationer var prospektiva studier av ≥ 10 patienter och med en uppföljningstid på ≥ 1 år. Autologt bentransplantat från mandibel/maxilla, oorganiskt ben (Bio-Oss), en kombination av dessa två samt sinuslyft utan insättning av bentransplant utvärderades. Kvaliteten på varje publikation bedömas enligt kriterier baserade på en modifiering av STROBE-statment. Resultat: Sökningen resulterade i 818 titlar och 15 inkluderade publikationer relevanta enligt förutbestämda inklusionskriterier. En studie var en randomiserad kontrollerad studie (RCT) och en var en kontrollerad klinisk studie (CCT). De återstående 13 studierna var observationsstudier. Uppföljningen varierade mellan ett och nio år, och antalet patienter mellan 10 och 191. Sinuslyft utan insättning av bentransplantat hade en implantatöverlevnad på 97,7% -100% och studier rörande autologt bentransplantat 98,8%. Bio-Oss resulterade i 86,3% -98,1% överlevnad och en kombination av Bio-Oss och autologt ben resulterade i en överlevnad på 90,7%. Slutsats: Enligt denna undersökning fanns ingen skillnad i implantat överlevnad mellan de olika bentransplantaten. Beroende på studiernas karaktär behövs fler RCT och CCT studier, som analyserar implantatutfallet, involverar sinuslyft och olika bentransplantat rörande implantatöverlevnad och lyckandefrekvens. / AbstractAims: The objective was to test the hypothesis that there is no difference in implant treatment outcome using different bone graft material for sinus floor augmentation.Material and methods: This systematic review is based on searches in PubMed, the Cochrane Library and the Web of Science and a hand search of relevant publications. Autologous bone, anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss), a combination of these two and elevation of the Schneiderian membrane with no graft material was evaluated. The quality of each publication was assessed according to criteria based on the STROBE-statements.Results: The search provided 818 titles and 15 were found relevant according to the predetermined inclusion criteria. One study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and one was a controlled clinical trial (CCT). The remaining 13 studies were observation studies. The follow-up time varied between one and nine years and the number of patients between 10 and 191. Studies on elevation of the Schneiderian membrane with no bone graft material reported an implant survival rate between 97.7% and100% and studies on only autologous bone graft material 98.8%. Bio-Oss as bone graft material resulted in 86.3%-98.1% survival rate and a combination of Bio-Oss and autologous bone graft resulted in a survival rate of 90.7%.Conclusion: There was no difference in implant outcome of the different bone graft material. More studies designed as RCT and CCT, which analyze the implant outcome involving sinus floor augmentation and different bone graft material are needed to improve evidence on survival and success rate.

Objetivo: Validar a proposta de cálculo do volume de seios maxilares, utilizando-se de imagens trans-axiais geradas por meio de tomografia computadorizada por feixe cônico, analisando as mesmas em software para edição de imagens, e comparando os volumes aferidos, com os obtidos por meio de molde dos seios maxilares com silicone de condensação fluido. Métodos: Foram utilizados 05 crânios secos com osteotomia axial, pertencentes ao acervo do Laboratório de Anatomia da Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, de modo que se pudesse observar os seios maxilares em vista superior, totalizando 6 sítios. Os sítios foram moldados com silicone de condensação flúido por meio da injeção do mesmo com uma seringa para elastômero, e modelos dos seios maxilares foram confeccionados por meio da imersão dos moldes de silicone em gesso. Os modelos de gesso foram hidratados e preenchidos com água até que se atingisse a altura de 10mm e esse volume de água foi removido por meio de uma pipeta graduada na qual pôde-se fazer a leitura do volume. A amostra foi então submetida a tomografia computadorizada por feixe cônico, para posterior reformatação em cortes trans-axiais, que foram analisados no software Photoshop CS3 Extended® e o cálculo do volume foi feito com auxílio do software Excel®. Resultados: Os dados obtidos pelos dois métodos foram comparados estatisticamente por meio de gráficos de perfis individuais, diagrama de dispersão (Bussab e Morettin), coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (Fleiss) e gráfico de Bland-Altman. Após análise dos métodos estatísticos se observou reprodutibilidade de ambos os métodos e forte correlação entre os mesmos. Conclusão: Os cortes trans-axiais da maxila, obtidos por meio da tomografia computadorizada por feixe cônico, podem ser utilizados para cálculo dos volumes de seios maxilares, quando da análise dos mesmos em software Photoshop CS3 Extended®, fornecendo valores de volume próximos e estatisticamente compatíveis aos obtidos por meio do molde dos seios maxilares com silicone de condensação (padrão ouro), de maneira sistematizada e de fácil reprodução. / Purpose: To validate the proposal for measurement of maxillary sinus volume, using cross-sectional images generated by cone beam computed tomography, which were analyzed with an image editor software, and comparing the estimated volumes with those obtained through impression with fluid condensation silicone. Methods: Five dry skulls axially osteotomized, from the São Paulo University City Anatomy Laboratory, were used to allow an upper view of the maxillary sinuses, totaling 6 sites. The sites were molded com fluid condensation silicone injected with an elastomer syringe, and maxillary sinus models were produced by immersing the silicone mold into plaster. The plaster casts were hydrated and fulfilled with water reaching 10 mm height, which was removed with a graduated pipette to determine the water volume. The sample underwent cone beam computed tomography and the images were reformatted to produce cross-sectional views, which were analyzed with Photoshop CS3 Extended®, and the volume was calculated using Excel®. Results: Data obtained by both methods were statistically compared based on individual profile graphic, dispersion diagram (Bussab and Morettin), intraclass correlation coefficient (Fleiss) and Bland-Altman plot. After being analyzed, the two statistical methods showed reproducibility and strong correlation. Conclusion: Cross-sectional views generated by cone beam computed tomography and analyzed with Photoshop CS3 Extended® are useful to calculate the maxillary sinus volume, in order to help in planning the maxillary sinus floor elevation surgery.

Objetivo: Validar a proposta de cálculo do volume de seios maxilares, utilizando-se de imagens trans-axiais geradas por meio de tomografia computadorizada por feixe cônico, analisando as mesmas em software para edição de imagens, e comparando os volumes aferidos, com os obtidos por meio de molde dos seios maxilares com silicone de condensação fluido. Métodos: Foram utilizados 05 crânios secos com osteotomia axial, pertencentes ao acervo do Laboratório de Anatomia da Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, de modo que se pudesse observar os seios maxilares em vista superior, totalizando 6 sítios. Os sítios foram moldados com silicone de condensação flúido por meio da injeção do mesmo com uma seringa para elastômero, e modelos dos seios maxilares foram confeccionados por meio da imersão dos moldes de silicone em gesso. Os modelos de gesso foram hidratados e preenchidos com água até que se atingisse a altura de 10mm e esse volume de água foi removido por meio de uma pipeta graduada na qual pôde-se fazer a leitura do volume. A amostra foi então submetida a tomografia computadorizada por feixe cônico, para posterior reformatação em cortes trans-axiais, que foram analisados no software Photoshop CS3 Extended® e o cálculo do volume foi feito com auxílio do software Excel®. Resultados: Os dados obtidos pelos dois métodos foram comparados estatisticamente por meio de gráficos de perfis individuais, diagrama de dispersão (Bussab e Morettin), coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (Fleiss) e gráfico de Bland-Altman. Após análise dos métodos estatísticos se observou reprodutibilidade de ambos os métodos e forte correlação entre os mesmos. Conclusão: Os cortes trans-axiais da maxila, obtidos por meio da tomografia computadorizada por feixe cônico, podem ser utilizados para cálculo dos volumes de seios maxilares, quando da análise dos mesmos em software Photoshop CS3 Extended®, fornecendo valores de volume próximos e estatisticamente compatíveis aos obtidos por meio do molde dos seios maxilares com silicone de condensação (padrão ouro), de maneira sistematizada e de fácil reprodução. / Purpose: To validate the proposal for measurement of maxillary sinus volume, using cross-sectional images generated by cone beam computed tomography, which were analyzed with an image editor software, and comparing the estimated volumes with those obtained through impression with fluid condensation silicone. Methods: Five dry skulls axially osteotomized, from the São Paulo University City Anatomy Laboratory, were used to allow an upper view of the maxillary sinuses, totaling 6 sites. The sites were molded com fluid condensation silicone injected with an elastomer syringe, and maxillary sinus models were produced by immersing the silicone mold into plaster. The plaster casts were hydrated and fulfilled with water reaching 10 mm height, which was removed with a graduated pipette to determine the water volume. The sample underwent cone beam computed tomography and the images were reformatted to produce cross-sectional views, which were analyzed with Photoshop CS3 Extended®, and the volume was calculated using Excel®. Results: Data obtained by both methods were statistically compared based on individual profile graphic, dispersion diagram (Bussab and Morettin), intraclass correlation coefficient (Fleiss) and Bland-Altman plot. After being analyzed, the two statistical methods showed reproducibility and strong correlation. Conclusion: Cross-sectional views generated by cone beam computed tomography and analyzed with Photoshop CS3 Extended® are useful to calculate the maxillary sinus volume, in order to help in planning the maxillary sinus floor elevation surgery.