RESUMO
Introduction: Considering oral rehabilitation with dental implants, many studies have aimed at improving bone regeneration through the use of biomaterials. Objective: This study aimed at comparing bone neoformation in patients undergoing bilateral maxillary sinus surgery with two bovine biomaterials. Materials and Methods: This is a randomized, blinded, clinical crossover, and divided mouth study. Ten participants with an indication of maxillary sinus enlargement were selected and underwent surgical treatment with Bio-Oss® graft biomaterial (graft 1) on one side and Lumina-Porous® graft biomaterial (graft 2) on the other. The samples were collected after nine months and fixed and then decalcified in 10% ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) solution for 30 days to process and make histological slides. Connective and bone tissue were further analyzed to identify the amount of newly formed bone. Results: The graft 1 group had a greater formation of vital mineralized tissue when compared to the graft 2 group (p = 0.01). For nonvital mineralized tissue and amount of connective tissue, there was no statistical difference (p = 0.21 and p = 0.09, respectively). The medullary spaces were larger in the graft 2 group. The group treated with graft 1 presented a higher percentage of osteoclasts and viable osteocytes compared to the graft 2 group (p = 0.014 and p = 0.027, respectively). Conclusion: Every day, new alternative biomaterials are offered as an option in oral rehabilitation. In this study, both treatments induced bone neoformation after 9 months; however, the group treated with Bio-Oss® showed a higher percentage of vital mineralized bone tissue.
RESUMO
Introduction:The global increase life expectancy and the resulting tooth loss has required searching for new rehabilitation alternatives in Dentistry. Biomaterials can be defined as any material that acts replacing a lost bone defect and its function. In Dentistry, many studies have aimed to improve bone regeneration through the use of BMPs for bone replacement. Objective: To review the literature on the use and clinical viability of human morphogenetic protein for the jaws reconstruction. Material and methods: The following databases were searched: Pubmed, Bireme, Lilacs, and Scielo and 30 articles published between 1965 and 2013 were found using the following descriptors: "dental implants", "maxillary sinus", and "biocompatible materials". Results: Several studies demonstrate the biological advantages of rhBMP-2 on bone regeneration of the jaws. In recent years, morphogenetic protein has presented a large clinical use. Conclusion: Despite being a high-cost biomaterial, rhBMP-2 is a viable and very effective alternative for reconstruction of defects of the face.