Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
, 2018, 3023096
eCollection

Maxillary Sinus Lift Using Autologous Periosteal Micrografts: A New Regenerative Approach and a Case Report of a 3-Year Follow-Up

Affiliations
Case Reports

Maxillary Sinus Lift Using Autologous Periosteal Micrografts: A New Regenerative Approach and a Case Report of a 3-Year Follow-Up

Saturnino Marco Lupi et al. Case Rep Dent.

Abstract

This case report discusses about an innovative bone regeneration method that involves the use of autologous periosteal micrografts, which were used for a maxillary sinus floor lift in a 52-year-old female patient. This method allows for harvesting of a graft that is to be seeded on a PLGA scaffold and involves collection of a very little amount of palatal periosteal tissue in the same surgical site after elevation of a flap and disaggregation of it by using a Rigenera® filter. Histological samples collected at the time of implant installation demonstrate a good degree of bone regeneration. The clinical and radiographic outcomes at the 3-year follow-up visit showed an adequate stability of hard and soft tissues around the implants. This report demonstrates the possibility to obtain a sufficient quality and quantity of bone with a progenitor cell-based micrograft and in turn make the site appropriate for an implant-supported rehabilitation procedure, with stable results over a period of two years.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preoperative panoramic radiograph of the patient.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Intraoral radiograph (Rinn® collimator) of the surgery site.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Connective tissue collected directly from the surgery site.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Tissue graft disaggregation with the Rigeneracons device, according to the manufacturer's instructions: 1 ml of sterile saline solution, performed for 120 seconds with implant contra-angle at 15 NCm and 70 rpm.
Figure 5
Figure 5
The syringe with progenitor cell-enriched suspension obtained via the periosteum disaggregation process.
Figure 6
Figure 6
The window elevation.
Figure 7
Figure 7
The biocomplex graft placement in the maxillary sinus, under the Schneider membrane.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Covering the osteotomy access with collagen and resorbable membrane.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Radiograph taken postimplantation.
Figure 10
Figure 10
Hematoxylin/eosin staining of samples at 4 months (a, b) after grafting with the Rigenera system. (a) 10x magnification, (b) 40x magnification.
Figure 11
Figure 11
Intraoral radiograph taken after 3 years.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 1 PubMed Central articles

References

    1. Peleg M., Mazor Z., Garg A. K. Augmentation grafting of the maxillary sinus and simultaneous implant placement in patients with 3 to 5 mm of residual alveolar bone height. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 1999;14(4):549–556. - PubMed
    1. Tawil G., Mawla M. Sinus floor elevation using a bovine bone mineral (Bio-Oss) with or without the concomitant use of a bilayered collagen barrier (Bio-Gide): a clinical report of immediate and delayed implant placement. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 2001;16(5):713–721. - PubMed
    1. Kim M. J., Jung U. W., Kim C. S., et al. Maxillary sinus septa: prevalence, height, location, and morphology. A reformatted computed tomography scan analysis. Journal of Periodontology. 2006;77(5):903–908. doi: 10.1902/jop.2006.050247. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jensen O. T., Shulman L. B., Block M. S., Iacono V. J. Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 1998;13:11–45. - PubMed
    1. Wallace S. S., Froum S. J. Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systematic review. Annals of Periodontology. 2003;8(1):328–343. doi: 10.1902/annals.2003.8.1.328. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback