Skip to content

Periosteal elevation in maxilla augmentation.

Augmentation of the maxillary sinus floor: Periosteal elevation versus autogenous bone and xenogenic material.

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON21889
Enrollment
10
Registered
2012-11-08
Start date
2013-01-20
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-03-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

At the department Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery of Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC) the routine procedure for sinus floor elevation prior to dental implant insertion is augmentation with a mixture of autogenous bone and xenogenous bone, which adds morbidity due to the donorsite. We want to augment the maxillary sinuses without using any substitutes by placing only a resorbable barrier to elevate the Schneiderian membrane of the floor of the sinus. Bone will be regenerated using the pe

Interventions

With this study we want to evaluate the bone quantity and quality after periosteal elevation of the Schneiderian membrane. We want to compare these results with sinus augmentation with a mixture of au

Sponsors

Maastricht University Medical Center
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. 18-75 years old; 2. Edentulous; 3. Residual bone heights of 1-8 mm; 4. Bone width of at least 5 mm.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Contraindications for general anaesthesia; 2. History of radiotherapy in the head/neck region; 3. Treated with bisphosphonates; 4. Poor oral hygiene; 5. Uncontrolled diabetes; 6. Pregnancy; 7. Infection; 8. Increased tendency to hemorrhages.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
CBCT: Computed tomographic follow-up is used for the evaluation of the bone amount and quality (28). A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) will be made pre-operatively. Four months postoperative a CBCT will be made. This will be necessary prior to implant insertion regardless to the chosen technique of augmentation. On this scan a direct comparison of bone height and volume can be made between the two augmented sinuses. Inserting implants in the maxilla follows this procedure. Four months after placing the implants a CBCT will be made to evaluate the bone quality surrounding the implants. Histology: During the regular procedure of implant insertion a canal must be drilled. During this study we will use the bone that is removed before insertion for histological research. Instead of using a solid burr for the preparation of the implant beds, we will use a trephine burr (diameter 3.5mm). This is a hollow shaped burr that allows us to take a bone core for histological evaluation before implant placement. No bone loss or extra defects are created.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Secondary endpoints are implant survival, prosthetic rehabilitation and patient’s satisfaction. We will also observe the appearance of complications like infection, bleeding and pain.

Contacts

Public ContactS.A.N. Lie

University Medical Center P. Debyelaan 25 Postbus 5800

suen.lie@mumc.nl+31 (0)43 3872010

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)