Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 23, 2026
Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration
Published on: November 16, 2018
Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation Using Platelet-Rich Plasma Combined With Either Biphasic Calcium Phosphate or
Silvio Taschieri1, Stefano Corbella, Roberto Weinstein
1*Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Research Centre in Oral Health, Università degli Studi di Milano†IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi‡Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Research Centre in Oral Implantology, Università degli Studi di Milano§Department of Health, Animal Science and Food Safety, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan||Department of Health Sciences "A. Avogadro," University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy.
Purpose:
Maxillary sinus floor elevation procedure has the objective of augmenting available bone in atrophic posterior maxilla to allow dental implants placement. The main aim of this prospective study was to evaluate clinically and histomorphometrically the performance of biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) used in conjunction with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) compared with demineralized bovine bone matrix (DBBM) and PRP in sinus floor elevation surgery.
Materials And Methods:
Patients candidate to sinus floor elevation were treated using either BCP and PRP or DBBM and PRP. Biopsies were retrieved using trephine bur during implant placement surgery 6 months after grafting. Clinical success of implants was evaluated 1 year after prosthesis delivery. Histomorphometric analysis was performed assessing the relative volume of newly formed bone.
Results:
A total of 20 patients were recruited, and 20 sinus augmentation procedures were performed, 10 for each group. A total of 42 implants were placed. One year after prosthetic loading a 100% implant survival rate was reported in both groups. Histomorphometric analysis revealed that the mean amount of new bone formation was 18.6 ± 3.3% in BCP group and it was 21.9 ± 4.9% in DBBM group, without statistically significant difference. In BCP group a greater amount of collagen type I was found with respect to DBBM group.
Conclusions:
Both grafting materials led to an excellent performance regarding implant survival rate after 1 year follow-up, without any significant adverse sequelae. A similar capability of inducing new bone formation was observed in both groups, even though the higher quantity of collagen type I in BCP group may suggest a greater potential for bone formation over time as compared with DBBM.
