Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study
Identifieur interne : 000E64 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000E63; suivant : 000E65Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study
Auteurs : Michael R. Norton ; Edward W. Odell ; Ian D. Thompson ; Richard J. CookSource :
- Clinical Oral Implants Research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 2003-12.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Abutment connection, Alveolar augmentation, Alveolar defects, Animal studies, Astra tech, Augmentation, Autogenous, Autogenous bone, Berglundh lindhe, Bioactive, Bioactive glass, Bone defects, Bone formation, Bone mineral, Bone xenograft, Bovine, Bovine bone, Bovine bone mineral, Bovine spongiform encephalopathy, Clin, Connective tissue, Consecutive series, Cortical plate, Defect, Dental implants, Dental institute, Dentistry, Extraction defects, Extraction sites, Extraction sockets, Geistlich pharma, Graft, Graft material, Graft particles, Healing time, Histologic, Histologic report, Histology, Histomorphometric, Human histologic study, Human histology, Impl, Implant, Implant placement, Implantation, Implants research, International journal, Intramarrow perforations, Lamellar bone, Maxillary sinus, Maxillary sinus augmentation, Maxillofacial, Maxillofacial implants, Native alveolus, Oral impl, Other implants, Percentage contact, Pilot study, Porcentaje medio, Pourcentage moyen, Residual, Residual graft, Restorative dentistry, Ridge maintenance, Ridge width, Routine protocol, Sinus, Sinus augmentation procedures, Socket, Survival rate, Tissu conjonctif, Trephine, Xenograft.
- Teeft :
- Abutment connection, Alveolar augmentation, Alveolar defects, Animal studies, Astra tech, Augmentation, Autogenous, Autogenous bone, Berglundh lindhe, Bioactive, Bioactive glass, Bone defects, Bone formation, Bone mineral, Bone xenograft, Bovine, Bovine bone, Bovine bone mineral, Bovine spongiform encephalopathy, Clin, Connective tissue, Consecutive series, Cortical plate, Defect, Dental implants, Dental institute, Dentistry, Extraction defects, Extraction sites, Extraction sockets, Geistlich pharma, Graft, Graft material, Graft particles, Healing time, Histologic, Histologic report, Histology, Histomorphometric, Human histologic study, Human histology, Impl, Implant, Implant placement, Implantation, Implants research, International journal, Intramarrow perforations, Lamellar bone, Maxillary sinus, Maxillary sinus augmentation, Maxillofacial, Maxillofacial implants, Native alveolus, Oral impl, Other implants, Percentage contact, Pilot study, Porcentaje medio, Pourcentage moyen, Residual, Residual graft, Restorative dentistry, Ridge maintenance, Ridge width, Routine protocol, Sinus, Sinus augmentation procedures, Socket, Survival rate, Tissu conjonctif, Trephine, Xenograft.
Abstract
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the osteoconductivity of bovine bone mineral in humans. Fifteen patients referred to a private specialist surgical practice were treated consecutively for the repair of alveolar defects, and/or ridge maintenance at the site of extraction sockets, prior to implantation. Bio‐Oss xenograft (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Switzerland) was utilized as the principal grafting material. Bone cores were trephined out at the time of implant placement and processed and examined to evaluate the tissue response under the light microscope. A total of 22 trephines were processed for histomorphometric evaluation to calculate the mean percentage of bone, residual graft and connective tissue by area. In addition, the mean percentage bone‐to‐graft contact was also calculated. The mean percentage area of new bone formation was 26.9%, and the percentage of residual graft and connective tissue as 25.6% and 47.4% respectively. The mean percentage contact length between bone and residual graft was 34%. One implant placed into a site, which was histologically identified as having little new bone and, unusually, an inflammatory infiltrate, failed with mobility at abutment connection. All other implants were restored into function, with a survival rate at baseline of 97%.
Url:
DOI: 10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00952.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title><author><name sortKey="Norton, Michael R" sort="Norton, Michael R" uniqKey="Norton M" first="Michael R." last="Norton">Michael R. Norton</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Specialist in Surgical Dentistry London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Odell, Edward W" sort="Odell, Edward W" uniqKey="Odell E" first="Edward W." last="Odell">Edward W. Odell</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Oral Medicine & Pathology, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Thompson, Ian D" sort="Thompson, Ian D" uniqKey="Thompson I" first="Ian D." last="Thompson">Ian D. Thompson</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Biomaterials Science, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Cook, Richard J" sort="Cook, Richard J" uniqKey="Cook R" first="Richard J." last="Cook">Richard J. Cook</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32</idno><date when="2003" year="2003">2003</date><idno type="doi">10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00952.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000E64</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000E64</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title><author><name sortKey="Norton, Michael R" sort="Norton, Michael R" uniqKey="Norton M" first="Michael R." last="Norton">Michael R. Norton</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Specialist in Surgical Dentistry London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Odell, Edward W" sort="Odell, Edward W" uniqKey="Odell E" first="Edward W." last="Odell">Edward W. Odell</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Oral Medicine & Pathology, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Thompson, Ian D" sort="Thompson, Ian D" uniqKey="Thompson I" first="Ian D." last="Thompson">Ian D. Thompson</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Biomaterials Science, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Cook, Richard J" sort="Cook, Richard J" uniqKey="Cook R" first="Richard J." last="Cook">Richard J. Cook</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Clinical Oral Implants Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH</title><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno><idno type="eISSN">1600-0501</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">14</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="775">775</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="783">783</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">9</biblScope><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2003-12">2003-12</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment connection</term><term>Alveolar augmentation</term><term>Alveolar defects</term><term>Animal studies</term><term>Astra tech</term><term>Augmentation</term><term>Autogenous</term><term>Autogenous bone</term><term>Berglundh lindhe</term><term>Bioactive</term><term>Bioactive glass</term><term>Bone defects</term><term>Bone formation</term><term>Bone mineral</term><term>Bone xenograft</term><term>Bovine</term><term>Bovine bone</term><term>Bovine bone mineral</term><term>Bovine spongiform encephalopathy</term><term>Clin</term><term>Connective tissue</term><term>Consecutive series</term><term>Cortical plate</term><term>Defect</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dental institute</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Extraction defects</term><term>Extraction sites</term><term>Extraction sockets</term><term>Geistlich pharma</term><term>Graft</term><term>Graft material</term><term>Graft particles</term><term>Healing time</term><term>Histologic</term><term>Histologic report</term><term>Histology</term><term>Histomorphometric</term><term>Human histologic study</term><term>Human histology</term><term>Impl</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant placement</term><term>Implantation</term><term>Implants research</term><term>International journal</term><term>Intramarrow perforations</term><term>Lamellar bone</term><term>Maxillary sinus</term><term>Maxillary sinus augmentation</term><term>Maxillofacial</term><term>Maxillofacial implants</term><term>Native alveolus</term><term>Oral impl</term><term>Other implants</term><term>Percentage contact</term><term>Pilot study</term><term>Porcentaje medio</term><term>Pourcentage moyen</term><term>Residual</term><term>Residual graft</term><term>Restorative dentistry</term><term>Ridge maintenance</term><term>Ridge width</term><term>Routine protocol</term><term>Sinus</term><term>Sinus augmentation procedures</term><term>Socket</term><term>Survival rate</term><term>Tissu conjonctif</term><term>Trephine</term><term>Xenograft</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment connection</term><term>Alveolar augmentation</term><term>Alveolar defects</term><term>Animal studies</term><term>Astra tech</term><term>Augmentation</term><term>Autogenous</term><term>Autogenous bone</term><term>Berglundh lindhe</term><term>Bioactive</term><term>Bioactive glass</term><term>Bone defects</term><term>Bone formation</term><term>Bone mineral</term><term>Bone xenograft</term><term>Bovine</term><term>Bovine bone</term><term>Bovine bone mineral</term><term>Bovine spongiform encephalopathy</term><term>Clin</term><term>Connective tissue</term><term>Consecutive series</term><term>Cortical plate</term><term>Defect</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dental institute</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Extraction defects</term><term>Extraction sites</term><term>Extraction sockets</term><term>Geistlich pharma</term><term>Graft</term><term>Graft material</term><term>Graft particles</term><term>Healing time</term><term>Histologic</term><term>Histologic report</term><term>Histology</term><term>Histomorphometric</term><term>Human histologic study</term><term>Human histology</term><term>Impl</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant placement</term><term>Implantation</term><term>Implants research</term><term>International journal</term><term>Intramarrow perforations</term><term>Lamellar bone</term><term>Maxillary sinus</term><term>Maxillary sinus augmentation</term><term>Maxillofacial</term><term>Maxillofacial implants</term><term>Native alveolus</term><term>Oral impl</term><term>Other implants</term><term>Percentage contact</term><term>Pilot study</term><term>Porcentaje medio</term><term>Pourcentage moyen</term><term>Residual</term><term>Residual graft</term><term>Restorative dentistry</term><term>Ridge maintenance</term><term>Ridge width</term><term>Routine protocol</term><term>Sinus</term><term>Sinus augmentation procedures</term><term>Socket</term><term>Survival rate</term><term>Tissu conjonctif</term><term>Trephine</term><term>Xenograft</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the osteoconductivity of bovine bone mineral in humans. Fifteen patients referred to a private specialist surgical practice were treated consecutively for the repair of alveolar defects, and/or ridge maintenance at the site of extraction sockets, prior to implantation. Bio‐Oss xenograft (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Switzerland) was utilized as the principal grafting material. Bone cores were trephined out at the time of implant placement and processed and examined to evaluate the tissue response under the light microscope. A total of 22 trephines were processed for histomorphometric evaluation to calculate the mean percentage of bone, residual graft and connective tissue by area. In addition, the mean percentage bone‐to‐graft contact was also calculated. The mean percentage area of new bone formation was 26.9%, and the percentage of residual graft and connective tissue as 25.6% and 47.4% respectively. The mean percentage contact length between bone and residual graft was 34%. One implant placed into a site, which was histologically identified as having little new bone and, unusually, an inflammatory infiltrate, failed with mobility at abutment connection. All other implants were restored into function, with a survival rate at baseline of 97%.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>implant</json:string><json:string>graft</json:string><json:string>augmentation</json:string><json:string>international journal</json:string><json:string>maxillofacial</json:string><json:string>xenograft</json:string><json:string>bovine bone mineral</json:string><json:string>sinus</json:string><json:string>maxillofacial implants</json:string><json:string>clin</json:string><json:string>impl</json:string><json:string>trephine</json:string><json:string>oral impl</json:string><json:string>bioactive</json:string><json:string>histomorphometric</json:string><json:string>implants research</json:string><json:string>histologic</json:string><json:string>autogenous</json:string><json:string>residual graft</json:string><json:string>bone formation</json:string><json:string>implant placement</json:string><json:string>dental implants</json:string><json:string>geistlich pharma</json:string><json:string>restorative dentistry</json:string><json:string>bovine</json:string><json:string>residual</json:string><json:string>abutment connection</json:string><json:string>autogenous bone</json:string><json:string>percentage contact</json:string><json:string>graft material</json:string><json:string>alveolar defects</json:string><json:string>porcentaje medio</json:string><json:string>bioactive glass</json:string><json:string>socket</json:string><json:string>histology</json:string><json:string>dentistry</json:string><json:string>implantation</json:string><json:string>bone mineral</json:string><json:string>astra tech</json:string><json:string>sinus augmentation procedures</json:string><json:string>connective tissue</json:string><json:string>extraction sockets</json:string><json:string>maxillary sinus augmentation</json:string><json:string>pilot study</json:string><json:string>defect</json:string><json:string>extraction defects</json:string><json:string>cortical plate</json:string><json:string>human histologic study</json:string><json:string>healing time</json:string><json:string>routine protocol</json:string><json:string>native alveolus</json:string><json:string>lamellar bone</json:string><json:string>graft particles</json:string><json:string>other implants</json:string><json:string>survival rate</json:string><json:string>animal studies</json:string><json:string>consecutive series</json:string><json:string>dental institute</json:string><json:string>pourcentage moyen</json:string><json:string>tissu conjonctif</json:string><json:string>berglundh lindhe</json:string><json:string>alveolar augmentation</json:string><json:string>ridge maintenance</json:string><json:string>human histology</json:string><json:string>bone defects</json:string><json:string>extraction sites</json:string><json:string>ridge width</json:string><json:string>maxillary sinus</json:string><json:string>bone xenograft</json:string><json:string>intramarrow perforations</json:string><json:string>bovine bone</json:string><json:string>histologic report</json:string><json:string>bovine spongiform encephalopathy</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Michael R. Norton</name><affiliations><json:string>Specialist in Surgical Dentistry London, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Edward W. Odell</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Oral Medicine & Pathology, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Ian D. Thompson</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Biomaterials Science, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, London, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Richard J. Cook</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>implant</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>osseointegration</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Bio‐Oss</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>xenograft</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>osteoconduction</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>human histomorphometry</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>CLR952</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-C8B0290F-5</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the osteoconductivity of bovine bone mineral in humans. Fifteen patients referred to a private specialist surgical practice were treated consecutively for the repair of alveolar defects, and/or ridge maintenance at the site of extraction sockets, prior to implantation. Bio‐Oss xenograft (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Switzerland) was utilized as the principal grafting material. Bone cores were trephined out at the time of implant placement and processed and examined to evaluate the tissue response under the light microscope. A total of 22 trephines were processed for histomorphometric evaluation to calculate the mean percentage of bone, residual graft and connective tissue by area. In addition, the mean percentage bone‐to‐graft contact was also calculated. The mean percentage area of new bone formation was 26.9%, and the percentage of residual graft and connective tissue as 25.6% and 47.4% respectively. The mean percentage contact length between bone and residual graft was 34%. One implant placed into a site, which was histologically identified as having little new bone and, unusually, an inflammatory infiltrate, failed with mobility at abutment connection. All other implants were restored into function, with a survival rate at baseline of 97%.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8.827</score><pdfWordCount>4487</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>29393</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>9</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>595 x 782 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>195</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1314</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>6</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title><pmid><json:string>15015955</json:string></pmid><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><title>Clinical Oral Implants Research</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</json:string></doi><issn><json:string>0905-7161</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1600-0501</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>CLR</json:string></publisherId><volume>14</volume><issue>6</issue><pages><first>775</first><last>783</last><total>9</total></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>2003</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName><json:string>UK Richard J</json:string><json:string>BDH Ltd, Poole</json:string><json:string>Department of Biomaterials Science, Imperial College of Science, Technology</json:string><json:string>Dental Institute, King</json:string><json:string>UK Correspondence</json:string><json:string>Department of Oral Medicine</json:string><json:string>Department of Oral</json:string><json:string>UK Ian D</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Intials</json:string><json:string>Michael R. Norton</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Switzerland</json:string><json:string>Milton Keynes</json:string><json:string>UK</json:string><json:string>Sweden</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>Taylor et al. 2002</json:string><json:string>Norton 1995</json:string><json:string>Houser et al. 2001</json:string><json:string>Yildirim et al. 2000</json:string><json:string>Piatelli et al. 1999</json:string><json:string>Hurzeler et al. 1997</json:string><json:string>Ac et al. (2000)</json:string><json:string>Berglundh & Lindhe 1997</json:string><json:string>Yildirim et al. (2000, 2001)</json:string><json:string>Maiorana et al. 2000</json:string><json:string>Johnson et al. 1997</json:string><json:string>Shapoff et al. 1997</json:string><json:string>Skoglund et al. 1997</json:string><json:string>Artzi et al. 2002</json:string><json:string>Piatteli et al. 1999</json:string><json:string>Benke et al. 2001</json:string><json:string>Norton et al</json:string><json:string>Camelo et al. 2001</json:string><json:string>Artzi et al. 2001</json:string><json:string>Wilson et al. 1981</json:string><json:string>Haas et al.</json:string><json:string>Yildirim et al 2001</json:string><json:string>Mellonig 2000</json:string><json:string>Piatelli et al. (1999)</json:string><json:string>Hising et al. 2001</json:string><json:string>Benke et al. (2001)</json:string><json:string>Wetzel et al. 1995</json:string><json:string>Wenz et al. 2001</json:string><json:string>Haas et al. 1998</json:string><json:string>Schepers et al. 1993</json:string><json:string>Yildirim et al. 2001</json:string><json:string>Valentini et al. 2000</json:string><json:string>Proussaefs et al. 2002</json:string><json:string>Turunen et al. 1997</json:string><json:string>Schwartz et al. 2000</json:string><json:string>Valentini & Abensur 1997</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-C8B0290F-5</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - engineering, biomedical</json:string><json:string>2 - dentistry, oral surgery & medicine</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - health sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - dentistry</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - Oral Surgery</json:string></scopus></categories><publicationDate>2003</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2003</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00952.x</json:string></doi><id>1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2003-12"></date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content-type" subtype="article" source="article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</note><note type="publication-type" subtype="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="article"><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title><title level="a" type="short">Efficacy of bovine bone mineral</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Michael R.</forename><surname>Norton</surname></persName><affiliation>Specialist in Surgical Dentistry London, UK<address><country key="GB"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Edward W.</forename><surname>Odell</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Oral Medicine & Pathology, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK<address><country key="GB"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Ian D.</forename><surname>Thompson</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Biomaterials Science, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, London, UK<address><country key="GB"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Richard J.</forename><surname>Cook</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK<address><country key="GB"></country></address></affiliation></author><idno type="istex">1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-C8B0290F-5</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00952.x</idno><idno type="unit">CLR952</idno><idno type="supplier">952</idno><idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:CLR.CLR952.pdf</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j" type="main">Clinical Oral Implants Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH</title><idno type="pISSN">0905-7161</idno><idno type="eISSN">1600-0501</idno><idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</idno><idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/clr.2003.14.issue-6</idno><idno type="product">CLR</idno><idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">14</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="775">775</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="783">783</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">9</biblScope><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2003-12"></date></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><p><hi rend="bold">Abstract: </hi> The purpose of this study was to evaluate the osteoconductivity of bovine bone mineral in humans. Fifteen patients referred to a private specialist surgical practice were treated consecutively for the repair of alveolar defects, and/or ridge maintenance at the site of extraction sockets, prior to implantation. Bio‐Oss xenograft (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Switzerland) was utilized as the principal grafting material. Bone cores were trephined out at the time of implant placement and processed and examined to evaluate the tissue response under the light microscope. A total of 22 trephines were processed for histomorphometric evaluation to calculate the mean percentage of bone, residual graft and connective tissue by area. In addition, the mean percentage bone‐to‐graft contact was also calculated. The mean percentage area of new bone formation was 26.9%, and the percentage of residual graft and connective tissue as 25.6% and 47.4% respectively. The mean percentage contact length between bone and residual graft was 34%. One implant placed into a site, which was histologically identified as having little new bone and, unusually, an inflammatory infiltrate, failed with mobility at abutment connection. All other implants were restored into function, with a survival rate at baseline of 97%.</p></abstract><abstract xml:lang="fr" style="main"><head>Résumé</head><p>Le but de cette étude a été d'évaluer l'ostéoconductivité du minéral osseux bovin chez les humains. Quinze patients envoyés vers une pratique spécilisée ont été traités pour la réparation de lésions alvéolaires et /ou du maintien du rebord osseux au site des alvéoles d'extraction avant le placement d'implants. La xénogreffe Bio‐Oss® a été utilisée en tant que matériel de greffe principal. Des carottes osseuses ont été prélevées au moment du placement des implants et examinées au microscope optique. Vingt‐deux carottes ont été analysées histomorphométriquement pour calculer le pourcentage moyen d'os, de greffon résiduel et de tissu conjonctif par zones. De plus le pourcentage moyen de contact os‐greffon a également été calculé. L'aire moyenne d'os néoforméétait de 27%, les pourcentages de greffon résiduel et de tissu conjonctif étaient respectivement de 26 et 47%. La longueur de contact moyenne entre l'os et le greffon résiduel était de 34%. Un implant placé dans un site identifié histologiquement comme possèdant peu de nouvel os et, évènement rare, un infiltrat inflammatoire, a échoué en ayant une mobilité au moment du placement du pilier. Tous les autres implants ont été restaurés avec un taux de survie au départ de 97%.</p></abstract><abstract xml:lang="de" style="main"><head>Zusammenfassung</head><p>Die Nützlichkeit eines Rinderknochenminerals beim Alveolarkammaufbau: eine histologische Studie.</p><p>Das Ziel dieser Studie war es, die Osteokonduktivität eines Rinderknochenminerals am Menschen zu untersuchen. Bei 15 Patienten, die einer privaten Spezialpraxis für Oralchirurgie zugewiesen worden waren, wurde vor der Implantation ein alveolärer Knochendefekt aufgefüllt und/oder eine Kammerhaltungstherapie nach Extraktion durchgeführt. Als Füllmaterial setzte man das Xenotransplantat Bio‐Oss (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Schweiz) als Hauptbestandteil ein. Während der Implantation entnahm man mit einem Trepanbohrer die als Nebenprodukt anfallenden Knochenzapfen, bereitete sie auf und untersuchte die Gewebsantwort unter dem Lichtmikroskop.</p><p>Für die histomorphometrischen Untersuchungen bereitete man 22 Knochenzapfen auf. Dann rechnete man in einem vorgegebenen Feld den mittleren prozentualen Anteil Knochen, übriggebliebenes Transplantat und Bindegewebe aus. Zusätzlich bestimmte man den mittleren prozentualen Kontakt zwischen Knochen und Transplantat. Die mittlere prozentuale Fläche neu gebildeten Knochens betrug 26.9%, beim zurückgebliebenen Transplantatmaterial betrug der Wert 25.6% und beim Bindegewebe 47.4%. Die durchschnittliche prozentuale Kontaktfläche zwischen Knochen und verbliebenem Transplantatmaterial betrug 34%.</p><p>Ein Implantat, das an einer Stelle implantiert worden war, die sich später histologisch als Stelle mit wenig neuem Knochen entpuppte und ein entzündetes Infiltrat aufwies, ging bei der Sekundärteilmontage infolge Beweglichkeit verloren. Alle anderen Implantate wurden mit funktionierenden Rekonstruktionen versehen und hatten bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt eine Überlebensrate von 97%.</p></abstract><abstract xml:lang="es" style="main"><head>Resumen</head><p>La intención de este estudio fue evaluar la osteoconductividad del mineral óseo bovino en humanos. Se trató a quince pacientes consecutivos remitidos a una consulta quirúrgica privada especializada para la reparación de defectos alveolares y/o mantenimiento de la cresta en el lugar de los alvéolos de extracción previamente a la implantación. Se utilizó xenoinjerto Bio‐Oss (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Suiza) como material principal de injerto. Se trepanaron núcleos de hueso en el momento de la colocación de los implantes y procesados y examinados para evaluar la respuesta tisular bajo microscopía óptica.</p><p>Se procesaron un total 22 trepanaciones para evaluación histomorfométrica para calcular el porcentaje medio de hueso, injerto residual y tejido conectivo por área. Además se calculó también el porcentaje medio de contacto hueso‐injerto. El porcentaje medio de área de formación de hueso nuevo fue del 26.9%, el porcentaje de injerto residual y tejido conectivo fueron del 25.6% y 47.4% respectivamente. El porcentaje medio de longitud de contacto entre hueso e injerto residual fue del 34%. Un implante colocado en un lugar, que se identificó histológicamente por tener poco hueso nuevo e, inusualmente, un infiltrado inflamatorio, fracasó con movilidad al colocar el pilar. Todos los demás implantes se restauraron en función, con un índice de supervivencia del 97% al inicio.</p><p>
<graphic url="image_n/CLR_952_fu1.gif" rend="inline image"></graphic>
</p></abstract><textClass><keywords xml:lang="en"><term xml:id="k1">implant</term><term xml:id="k2">osseointegration</term><term xml:id="k3">Bio‐Oss</term><term xml:id="k4">xenograft</term><term xml:id="k5">osteoconduction</term><term xml:id="k6">human histomorphometry</term></keywords><keywords rend="tocHeading1"><term>Original Articles</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en"></language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</doi><issn type="print">0905-7161</issn><issn type="electronic">1600-0501</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="CLR"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH">Clinical Oral Implants Research</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="12006"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/clr.2003.14.issue-6</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="14">14</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="6">6</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2003-12">December 2003</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="15" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00952.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="CLR952"></id><id type="supplier" value="952"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="9"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Articles</title></titleGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2003-11-14"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2003-11-14"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:FullText result:FullText" date="2010-03-12"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:4.0.1" date="2014-03-12"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-16"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="775">775</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="783">783</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo><b>Correspondence to:</b>
<i>Michael R. Norton</i>
98 Harley Street
London W1G 7HZ
UK.
Tel.: +44 20 7486 9229
Fax: +44 20 7486 9119
e‐mail: <email normalForm="drnorton@nortonimplants.com">drnorton@nortonimplants.com</email></correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:CLR.CLR952.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory><b>Date:</b> Accepted 24 October 2002</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="10"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="1"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="34"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="6087"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="39"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title><title type="shortAuthors">Norton et al.</title><title type="short">Efficacy of bovine bone mineral</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Michael R.</givenNames><familyName>Norton</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Edward W.</givenNames><familyName>Odell</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a3"><personName><givenNames>Ian D.</givenNames><familyName>Thompson</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr4" affiliationRef="#a4"><personName><givenNames>Richard J.</givenNames><familyName>Cook</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="GB"><unparsedAffiliation>Specialist in Surgical Dentistry London, UK</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="GB"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Oral Medicine & Pathology, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a3" countryCode="GB"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Biomaterials Science, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, London, UK</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a4" countryCode="GB"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">implant</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">osseointegration</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">Bio‐Oss</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">xenograft</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">osteoconduction</keyword><keyword xml:id="k6">human histomorphometry</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p><b>Abstract: </b> The purpose of this study was to evaluate the osteoconductivity of bovine bone mineral in humans. Fifteen patients referred to a private specialist surgical practice were treated consecutively for the repair of alveolar defects, and/or ridge maintenance at the site of extraction sockets, prior to implantation. Bio‐Oss xenograft (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Switzerland) was utilized as the principal grafting material. Bone cores were trephined out at the time of implant placement and processed and examined to evaluate the tissue response under the light microscope. A total of 22 trephines were processed for histomorphometric evaluation to calculate the mean percentage of bone, residual graft and connective tissue by area. In addition, the mean percentage bone‐to‐graft contact was also calculated. The mean percentage area of new bone formation was 26.9%, and the percentage of residual graft and connective tissue as 25.6% and 47.4% respectively. The mean percentage contact length between bone and residual graft was 34%. One implant placed into a site, which was histologically identified as having little new bone and, unusually, an inflammatory infiltrate, failed with mobility at abutment connection. All other implants were restored into function, with a survival rate at baseline of 97%.</p><!--
To cite this article:
Norton MR, Odell EW, Thompson ID, Cook RJ. Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study.
Clin. Oral Impl. Res.14, 2003, 775–783
--></abstract><abstract type="main" xml:lang="fr"><title type="main">Résumé</title><p>Le but de cette étude a été d'évaluer l'ostéoconductivité du minéral osseux bovin chez les humains. Quinze patients envoyés vers une pratique spécilisée ont été traités pour la réparation de lésions alvéolaires et /ou du maintien du rebord osseux au site des alvéoles d'extraction avant le placement d'implants. La xénogreffe Bio‐Oss® a été utilisée en tant que matériel de greffe principal. Des carottes osseuses ont été prélevées au moment du placement des implants et examinées au microscope optique. Vingt‐deux carottes ont été analysées histomorphométriquement pour calculer le pourcentage moyen d'os, de greffon résiduel et de tissu conjonctif par zones. De plus le pourcentage moyen de contact os‐greffon a également été calculé. L'aire moyenne d'os néoforméétait de 27%, les pourcentages de greffon résiduel et de tissu conjonctif étaient respectivement de 26 et 47%. La longueur de contact moyenne entre l'os et le greffon résiduel était de 34%. Un implant placé dans un site identifié histologiquement comme possèdant peu de nouvel os et, évènement rare, un infiltrat inflammatoire, a échoué en ayant une mobilité au moment du placement du pilier. Tous les autres implants ont été restaurés avec un taux de survie au départ de 97%.</p></abstract><abstract type="main" xml:lang="de"><title type="main">Zusammenfassung</title><p>Die Nützlichkeit eines Rinderknochenminerals beim Alveolarkammaufbau: eine histologische Studie.</p><p>Das Ziel dieser Studie war es, die Osteokonduktivität eines Rinderknochenminerals am Menschen zu untersuchen. Bei 15 Patienten, die einer privaten Spezialpraxis für Oralchirurgie zugewiesen worden waren, wurde vor der Implantation ein alveolärer Knochendefekt aufgefüllt und/oder eine Kammerhaltungstherapie nach Extraktion durchgeführt. Als Füllmaterial setzte man das Xenotransplantat Bio‐Oss (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Schweiz) als Hauptbestandteil ein. Während der Implantation entnahm man mit einem Trepanbohrer die als Nebenprodukt anfallenden Knochenzapfen, bereitete sie auf und untersuchte die Gewebsantwort unter dem Lichtmikroskop.</p><p>Für die histomorphometrischen Untersuchungen bereitete man 22 Knochenzapfen auf. Dann rechnete man in einem vorgegebenen Feld den mittleren prozentualen Anteil Knochen, übriggebliebenes Transplantat und Bindegewebe aus. Zusätzlich bestimmte man den mittleren prozentualen Kontakt zwischen Knochen und Transplantat. Die mittlere prozentuale Fläche neu gebildeten Knochens betrug 26.9%, beim zurückgebliebenen Transplantatmaterial betrug der Wert 25.6% und beim Bindegewebe 47.4%. Die durchschnittliche prozentuale Kontaktfläche zwischen Knochen und verbliebenem Transplantatmaterial betrug 34%.</p><p>Ein Implantat, das an einer Stelle implantiert worden war, die sich später histologisch als Stelle mit wenig neuem Knochen entpuppte und ein entzündetes Infiltrat aufwies, ging bei der Sekundärteilmontage infolge Beweglichkeit verloren. Alle anderen Implantate wurden mit funktionierenden Rekonstruktionen versehen und hatten bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt eine Überlebensrate von 97%.</p></abstract><abstract type="main" xml:lang="es"><title type="main">Resumen</title><p>La intención de este estudio fue evaluar la osteoconductividad del mineral óseo bovino en humanos. Se trató a quince pacientes consecutivos remitidos a una consulta quirúrgica privada especializada para la reparación de defectos alveolares y/o mantenimiento de la cresta en el lugar de los alvéolos de extracción previamente a la implantación. Se utilizó xenoinjerto Bio‐Oss (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Suiza) como material principal de injerto. Se trepanaron núcleos de hueso en el momento de la colocación de los implantes y procesados y examinados para evaluar la respuesta tisular bajo microscopía óptica.</p><p>Se procesaron un total 22 trepanaciones para evaluación histomorfométrica para calcular el porcentaje medio de hueso, injerto residual y tejido conectivo por área. Además se calculó también el porcentaje medio de contacto hueso‐injerto. El porcentaje medio de área de formación de hueso nuevo fue del 26.9%, el porcentaje de injerto residual y tejido conectivo fueron del 25.6% y 47.4% respectivamente. El porcentaje medio de longitud de contacto entre hueso e injerto residual fue del 34%. Un implante colocado en un lugar, que se identificó histológicamente por tener poco hueso nuevo e, inusualmente, un infiltrado inflamatorio, fracasó con movilidad al colocar el pilar. Todos los demás implantes se restauraron en función, con un índice de supervivencia del 97% al inicio.</p><p> <inlineGraphic alt="inline image" location="image_n/CLR_952_fu1.gif" href=""></inlineGraphic> </p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Efficacy of bovine bone mineral</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Michael R.</namePart><namePart type="family">Norton</namePart><affiliation>Specialist in Surgical Dentistry London, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Edward W.</namePart><namePart type="family">Odell</namePart><affiliation>Department of Oral Medicine & Pathology, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Ian D.</namePart><namePart type="family">Thompson</namePart><affiliation>Department of Biomaterials Science, Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine, London, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Richard J.</namePart><namePart type="family">Cook</namePart><affiliation>Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, GKT Dental Institute, King's College, London, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2003-12</dateIssued><edition>Date: Accepted 24 October 2002</edition><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2003</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><extent unit="figures">10</extent><extent unit="tables">1</extent><extent unit="formulas">0</extent><extent unit="references">34</extent><extent unit="linksCrossRef">39</extent><extent unit="words">6087</extent></physicalDescription><abstract>Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the osteoconductivity of bovine bone mineral in humans. Fifteen patients referred to a private specialist surgical practice were treated consecutively for the repair of alveolar defects, and/or ridge maintenance at the site of extraction sockets, prior to implantation. Bio‐Oss xenograft (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Switzerland) was utilized as the principal grafting material. Bone cores were trephined out at the time of implant placement and processed and examined to evaluate the tissue response under the light microscope. A total of 22 trephines were processed for histomorphometric evaluation to calculate the mean percentage of bone, residual graft and connective tissue by area. In addition, the mean percentage bone‐to‐graft contact was also calculated. The mean percentage area of new bone formation was 26.9%, and the percentage of residual graft and connective tissue as 25.6% and 47.4% respectively. The mean percentage contact length between bone and residual graft was 34%. One implant placed into a site, which was histologically identified as having little new bone and, unusually, an inflammatory infiltrate, failed with mobility at abutment connection. All other implants were restored into function, with a survival rate at baseline of 97%.</abstract><abstract lang="fr">Le but de cette étude a été d'évaluer l'ostéoconductivité du minéral osseux bovin chez les humains. Quinze patients envoyés vers une pratique spécilisée ont été traités pour la réparation de lésions alvéolaires et /ou du maintien du rebord osseux au site des alvéoles d'extraction avant le placement d'implants. La xénogreffe Bio‐Oss® a été utilisée en tant que matériel de greffe principal. Des carottes osseuses ont été prélevées au moment du placement des implants et examinées au microscope optique. Vingt‐deux carottes ont été analysées histomorphométriquement pour calculer le pourcentage moyen d'os, de greffon résiduel et de tissu conjonctif par zones. De plus le pourcentage moyen de contact os‐greffon a également été calculé. L'aire moyenne d'os néoforméétait de 27%, les pourcentages de greffon résiduel et de tissu conjonctif étaient respectivement de 26 et 47%. La longueur de contact moyenne entre l'os et le greffon résiduel était de 34%. Un implant placé dans un site identifié histologiquement comme possèdant peu de nouvel os et, évènement rare, un infiltrat inflammatoire, a échoué en ayant une mobilité au moment du placement du pilier. Tous les autres implants ont été restaurés avec un taux de survie au départ de 97%.</abstract><abstract lang="de">Die Nützlichkeit eines Rinderknochenminerals beim Alveolarkammaufbau: eine histologische Studie. Das Ziel dieser Studie war es, die Osteokonduktivität eines Rinderknochenminerals am Menschen zu untersuchen. Bei 15 Patienten, die einer privaten Spezialpraxis für Oralchirurgie zugewiesen worden waren, wurde vor der Implantation ein alveolärer Knochendefekt aufgefüllt und/oder eine Kammerhaltungstherapie nach Extraktion durchgeführt. Als Füllmaterial setzte man das Xenotransplantat Bio‐Oss (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Schweiz) als Hauptbestandteil ein. Während der Implantation entnahm man mit einem Trepanbohrer die als Nebenprodukt anfallenden Knochenzapfen, bereitete sie auf und untersuchte die Gewebsantwort unter dem Lichtmikroskop. Für die histomorphometrischen Untersuchungen bereitete man 22 Knochenzapfen auf. Dann rechnete man in einem vorgegebenen Feld den mittleren prozentualen Anteil Knochen, übriggebliebenes Transplantat und Bindegewebe aus. Zusätzlich bestimmte man den mittleren prozentualen Kontakt zwischen Knochen und Transplantat. Die mittlere prozentuale Fläche neu gebildeten Knochens betrug 26.9%, beim zurückgebliebenen Transplantatmaterial betrug der Wert 25.6% und beim Bindegewebe 47.4%. Die durchschnittliche prozentuale Kontaktfläche zwischen Knochen und verbliebenem Transplantatmaterial betrug 34%. Ein Implantat, das an einer Stelle implantiert worden war, die sich später histologisch als Stelle mit wenig neuem Knochen entpuppte und ein entzündetes Infiltrat aufwies, ging bei der Sekundärteilmontage infolge Beweglichkeit verloren. Alle anderen Implantate wurden mit funktionierenden Rekonstruktionen versehen und hatten bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt eine Überlebensrate von 97%.</abstract><abstract lang="es">La intención de este estudio fue evaluar la osteoconductividad del mineral óseo bovino en humanos. Se trató a quince pacientes consecutivos remitidos a una consulta quirúrgica privada especializada para la reparación de defectos alveolares y/o mantenimiento de la cresta en el lugar de los alvéolos de extracción previamente a la implantación. Se utilizó xenoinjerto Bio‐Oss (Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Suiza) como material principal de injerto. Se trepanaron núcleos de hueso en el momento de la colocación de los implantes y procesados y examinados para evaluar la respuesta tisular bajo microscopía óptica. Se procesaron un total 22 trepanaciones para evaluación histomorfométrica para calcular el porcentaje medio de hueso, injerto residual y tejido conectivo por área. Además se calculó también el porcentaje medio de contacto hueso‐injerto. El porcentaje medio de área de formación de hueso nuevo fue del 26.9%, el porcentaje de injerto residual y tejido conectivo fueron del 25.6% y 47.4% respectivamente. El porcentaje medio de longitud de contacto entre hueso e injerto residual fue del 34%. Un implante colocado en un lugar, que se identificó histológicamente por tener poco hueso nuevo e, inusualmente, un infiltrado inflamatorio, fracasó con movilidad al colocar el pilar. Todos los demás implantes se restauraron en función, con un índice de supervivencia del 97% al inicio.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>implant</topic><topic>osseointegration</topic><topic>Bio‐Oss</topic><topic>xenograft</topic><topic>osteoconduction</topic><topic>human histomorphometry</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Clinical Oral Implants Research</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0905-7161</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1600-0501</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">CLR</identifier><part><date>2003</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>14</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>6</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>775</start><end>783</end><total>9</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-C8B0290F-5</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1046/j.0905-7161.2003.00952.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">CLR952</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-L0C46X92-X">wiley</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Munksgaard International Publishers</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000E64 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000E64 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:1D7F17FB612C50B3BD40FA69D5B169C9B6E98E32
|texte= Efficacy of bovine bone mineral for alveolar augmentation: a human histologic study
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |