Reimplantation of cultivated human bone cells from the posterior maxilla for sinus floor augmentation. Histological results from a randomized controlled clinical trial

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the present randomized clinical study was to evaluate histologically whether the addition of cultivated, autogenous bone cells to a composite graft of deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) and autogenous bone (AB) for sinus floor augmentation (SFA) enhance bone formation compared with what achieved after SFA with DBBM + AB alone.

Material and methods: Twenty patients with remaining posterior maxillary alveolar crest height of less than 3 mm received SFA after randomization either with an DBBM and AB composite in a 1 : 1 ratio or with DBBM + AB supplemented with autogenous bone cells, which were cultivated from a bone biopsy harvested earlier from the tuberosity area. Four months after SFA, two cylindrical biopsies were taken from the augmented sinuses concomitantly with the implant site preparation by means of a trephine bur. An additional biopsy was taken from the tuberosity area. Bone density at the augmented sinus and the tuberosity area and the height of augmentation were estimated on non-decalcified histological sections prepared from the biopsies. A relative bone density index (RBD) was also calculated by dividing bone density at the augmented sinus with bone density at the tuberosity area.

Results: All patients but one could receive two implants after SFA; in one patient, only one implant could be placed. All implants were osseointegrated and could be loaded. Median bone density in the sinus was 30% and 25% in the cell seeded and no-cells added DBBM + AB groups, respectively. Bone augmentation height averaged 6.0 and 5.4 mm and RBD averaged 0.48 and 0.73 in the cell seeded and no-cells added DBBM + AB groups, respectively. None of the differences between groups was statistically significant.

Conclusions: Cultivated autogenous bone cell seeded to a DBBM + AB composite did not significantly improve bone formation (density and height) after SFA, compared with what was achieved with DBBM + AB alone. Both approaches resulted into enough bone to support implant placement and osseointegration.