Histological Outcomes on the Development of New Space-making Devices for Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation

Background: Previous studies have pointed out that the mere elevation of the maxillary sinus membrane promotes bone formation without the use of augmentation materials. Purpose: This experimental study aimed at evaluating if the two-stage procedure for sinus floor augmentation could benefit from the use of a space-making device in order to increase the bone volume to enable later implant installation with good primary stability. Materials and Methods: Six male tufted capuchin primates (Cebus apella) were subjected to extraction of the three premolars and the first molar on both sides of the maxilla to create an edentulous area. The sinuses were opened using the lateral bone-wall window technique, and the membrane was elevated. One resorbable space-making device was inserted in each maxillary sinus, and the bone window was returned in place. The animals were euthanatized after 6 months, and biopsy blocks containing the whole maxillary sinus and surrounding soft tissues were prepared for ground sections. Results: The histological examination of the specimens showed bone formation in contact with both the schneiderian membrane and the device in most cases even when the device was displaced. The process of bone formation indicates that this technique is potentially useful for two-stage sinus floor augmentation. The lack of stabilization of the device within the sinus demands further improvement of space-makers for predictable bone augmentation. Conclusions: It is concluded that (1) the device used in this study did not trigger any important inflammatory reaction; (2) when the sinus membrane was elevated, bone formation was a constant finding; and (3) an ideal space-making device should be stable and elevate the membrane to ensure a maintained connection between the membrane and the secluded space.

Unilateral Correction of Space Loss in the Mixed Dentition

Distalization of maxillary molars is indicated for correction of Class II dental malocclusion and for space gain in cases of space deficiency. The ideal treatment with an intraoral fixed appliance for molar distalization should fulfill the following requirements: patient compliance; acceptable esthetics; comfort; minimum anterior anchor loss (as evidenced by inclination of incisors); bodily movement of the molars to avoid undesirable effects and unstable outcomes; and minimum time required during sessions for placement and activations. The purpose of this paper was to present an alternative treatment for space recovery in the area of the maxillary right second premolar when there has been significant mesial movement of the permanent maxillary right first molar. We used a modified appliance that allows unilateral molar distalization in cases of unilateral tooth/arch size discrepancy using the opposite side as anchor, thus reducing the mesialization of the anterior teeth. (Pediatr Dent 2008;30:334-41) Received August 17, 2006 / Last Revision October 17, 2007 / Revision Accepted October 17, 2007