Radiologic evaluation of putty versus powder form of demineralized bone matrix in sinus floor elevation

Demineralized bone matrix for repair and regeneration of maxillofacial defects: A narrative review

OBJECTIVES

Demineralized bone matrix (DBM) is a well-established bone graft material widely accepted by dentists and the public for its favorable osteoconductivity and osteoinductive potential. This article aimed to provide a narrative review of the current therapeutic applications and limitations of DBM in maxillofacial bone defects.

STUDY SELECTION, DATA, AND SOURCES

Randomized controlled trials, prospective or retrospective clinical studies, case series and reports, and systematic reviews. MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar were searched using keywords.

CONCLUSIONS

Some evidence supported the therapeutic application of DBM in periodontal intrabony defects, maxillary sinus lifts, ridge preservation, ridge augmentation, alveolar cleft repair, orthognathic surgery, and other regional maxillofacial bone defects. However, the limitations of DBM should be considered when using it, including potential low immunogenicity, instability of osteoinductive potential, handling of the graft material, and patient acceptance.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

With the increasing demand for the treatment of maxillofacial bone defects, DBM is likely to play a greater role as a promising bone graft material. Safe and effective combination treatment strategies and how to maintain a stable osteoinductive potential will be the future challenges of DBM research.

Radiographic Evaluation of Low-Level Laser Therapy-Enhanced Maxillary Sinus Augmentation with Simultaneous Dental Implant Placement

Background

To evaluate the effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on bone healing in patients undergoing bilateral sinus lifting and simultaneous dental implant application.

Methods

Twelve patients with total/partial posterior maxillary edentulism who needed bilateral sinus bone augmentation were included in the study. Dental implants were inserted in the same session. LLLT (λ = 630-660 nm, 25 mW/cm², 6 min) was used for one operation side on the 1^st, 3^rd, 5^th, and 7^th days, whereas contralateral side served as control side. Preoperative and postoperative 1^st, 3^rd, and 6^th month orthopantomograms were obtained using the aluminum step-wedge technique. Optic density analyses were performed using a Cardinal Health Digital Densitometer (Fluke Biomedical 07-443) with 1 mm diameter. Digital densitometry results were obtained as the equivalent aluminum thickness for each radiograph. These data were used to evaluate the changes in optical bone density and to compare the treatment side with the control side for each patient.

Results

The LLLT side showed better results than the control side according to the densitometry results. Increase in the bone density at all the postoperative intervals was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

LLLT enhances bone regeneration in sinus augmentation with simultaneous dental implant placement.