COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE USE OF AMNIOTIC MEMBRANE AND FIBRIN GLUE FOR THE REPAIR OF PERFORATED MAXILLARY SINUS (AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY)
Selim, M., Shaaban, A., Ragab, H., Khalil, N. (2020). COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE USE OF AMNIOTIC MEMBRANE AND FIBRIN GLUE FOR THE REPAIR OF PERFORATED MAXILLARY SINUS (AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY). EKB Journal Management System, 45(2), 91-98. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.88444
Maather A. Selim; Ahmed M. Shaaban; Hala R. Ragab; Nesma M. Khalil. "COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE USE OF AMNIOTIC MEMBRANE AND FIBRIN GLUE FOR THE REPAIR OF PERFORATED MAXILLARY SINUS (AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY)". EKB Journal Management System, 45, 2, 2020, 91-98. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.88444
Selim, M., Shaaban, A., Ragab, H., Khalil, N. (2020). 'COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE USE OF AMNIOTIC MEMBRANE AND FIBRIN GLUE FOR THE REPAIR OF PERFORATED MAXILLARY SINUS (AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY)', EKB Journal Management System, 45(2), pp. 91-98. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.88444
Selim, M., Shaaban, A., Ragab, H., Khalil, N. COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE USE OF AMNIOTIC MEMBRANE AND FIBRIN GLUE FOR THE REPAIR OF PERFORATED MAXILLARY SINUS (AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY). EKB Journal Management System, 2020; 45(2): 91-98. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.88444

COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE USE OF AMNIOTIC MEMBRANE AND FIBRIN GLUE FOR THE REPAIR OF PERFORATED MAXILLARY SINUS (AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY)

Alexandria Dental Journal
Article 15, Volume 45, Issue 2, August 2020, Page 91-98  XML PDF (787.71 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.88444
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Maather A. Selim email 1; Ahmed M. Shaaban2; Hala R. Ragab3; Nesma M. Khalil4
1BDS, 2006, faculty of dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
2Professor of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery, faculty of dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
3Assistant professor of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery, faculty of dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
4Lecturer of Oral Biology, faculty of dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
Abstract
Introduction: Maxillary sinus membrane perforation is the most common intraoperative complications associated with the sinus lifting procedure. There are various sutureless techniques used in repairing of perforated sinus membrane including; collagen membrane, fibrin sealants, cyanoacrylate adhesives,amniotic membrane and fibringlue.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare between the use of amniotic membrane and fibrin glue in healing of perforated maxillary sinus in rabbits.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: This study was conducted on ten adult healthy male rabbits, with an average weight between 2-3 kgs. A split mouth design was implemented. In each rabbit, the right sinus membrane window was repaired by fibrin glue (group I), while the left sinus membrane window was repaired by amniotic membrane (group II).
Results: Histological results revealed that amniotic membrane enhanced faster reepithelialization of maxillary sinus membrane and bone healing where the amount of the newly formed bone observed in group II was greater than that of group I.  Histomorphometric analysis showed the increase in the bone surface area mean percentage in group II in comparison to group I.
Conclusion: According to the results of the present study, it was concluded that the amniotic membrane is effective in the repair of perforated sinus membrane with superior potentiality than fibrin glue especially in the early stage.
Keywords
Maxillary sinus repair; Amniotic membrane; Fibrin glue; Sutureless technique
References
  1. Hernndez-Alfaro F, Torradeflot MM, Marti C. Prevalence and management of Schneidarian membrane perforations during sinus-lift procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 91-8.
  2. Konter U, Pape HD. Oroantral fistula and maxillary sinusitis after the sinus lift. Dtsch Z Mund Kiefer GesichtsChir 1995; 19: 32-4.
  3. Aimetti M, Romagnoli R, Ricci G, Massei G. Maxillary sinus elevation: the effect of macrolacerations and microlacerations of the sinus membrane as determined by endoscopy. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2001; 21: 581-9.
  4. Pikos MA. Maxillary sinus membrane repair: update on technique for large and complete perforations. Implant Dent 2008; 17: 24-31.
  5. Pikos MA. Maxillary sinus membrane repair: report of a technique for large perforations. Implant Dent 1999; 8: 29-34.
  6. Proussaefs P, Lozada J, Kim J. Effects of sealing the perforated sinus membrane with a resorbable collagen membrane: a pilot study in humans. J Oral Implantol 2003; 29: 235-41.
  7. Choi BH, Zhu SJ, Jung JH. Cyanoacrylate adhesive for closing sinus membrane perforations during sinus lifts. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2006; 34: 505-9.
  8. Choi BH, Zhu SJ, Jung JH,Lee S,Huh J. The use of autologous fibrin glue for closing sinus membrane perforations during sinus lifts. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 101: 150-4.
  9. Davis B, Sandor GKB. Use of fibrin glue in maxillofacial surgery. J Otolaryngol 1998; 27: 107-12.
  10. Danforth DN, Hull RW. The microscopic anatomy of the fetal membranes with particular reference to the detailed structure of the amnion. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1958; 75:536-47.
  11. Bourne GL. The microscopic anatomy of the human amnion and chorion. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1960; 79:1070-10.
  12. Díaz-Prado S, Rendal-Vázquez ME, Muiños-López E, Hermida-Gómez T, Rodríguez-Cabarcos M, FuentesBoquete I, de Toro FJ, Blanco FJ. Potential use of the human amniotic membrane as a scaffold in human articular cartilage repair. Cell Tissue Bank. 2010; 11:183-95.
  13. Hennerbichler S, Reichl B, Pleiner D, Gabriel C, Eibl J, Redl H. The influence of various storage conditions on cell viability in amniotic membrane. Cell Tissue Bank. 2007; 8:1-8.
  14. Shortt AJ, Secker GA, Lomas RJ, Wilshaw SP, Kearney JN, Tuft SJ, Daniels JT. The effect of amniotic membrane preparation method on its ability to serve as a substrate for the ex-vivo expansion of limbal epithelial cells. Biomaterials. 2009; 30:1056-65.
  15. TsengSCG, PrabhasawatP, LeeSH. Amniotic membrane transplantation for conjunctival surface reconstruction. Am J Ophthalmol1997; 124:765–774.
  16. Samandari MH, Yaghmaei M, Ejlali M, Moshref M, Saffar AS. Use of amnion as a graft material in vestibuloplasty: a preliminary report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004; 97:574-8.
  17. Toda A, Okabe M, Yoshida T, Nikaido T. The potential of amniotic membrane/amnion-derived cells for regeneration of various tissues. J Pharmacol Sci 2007; 105: 215-28.
  18. Mamede AC, Carvalho MJ, Abrantes AM, Laranjo M, Maia CJ, Botelho MF. Amniotic membrane: from structure and functions to clinical applications. Cell Tissue Res 2012; 349: 447- 58.
  19. Kesting MR, Loeffelbein DJ, Classen M, SlottaHuspenina J, Hasler RJ, Jacobsen F, Kreutzer K, AlBenna S, Wolff K, Steinstraesser L. Repair of oronasal fistulas with human amniotic membrane in minipigs. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 48:131-135.
  20. Abdussamad RAE, Sadakah AA, Gab Allah OM, Nowair IM. Evaluation of maxillary sinus membrane repair using two different sutureless techniques. Tanta Dent J. 2015; 12:225-34.
  21. Priemel M, von Domarus C, Klatte TO, Kessler S, Schlie J, Meier S, Proksch N, Pastor F, Netter C, Streichert T, Püschel K, Amling M. Bone mineralization defects and vitamin D deficiency: histomorphometric analysis of iliac crest bone biopsies and circulating 25‐hydroxyvitamin D in 675 patients. J. of Bone and Miner Res. 2010;25:305-12.
  22. Parfitt AM, Drezner MK, Glorieux FH, Kanis aja, Malluche H, Meunier PJ, Ott SM, Recker RR. Bone histomorphometry: standardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units: report of the ASBMR Histomorphometry Nomenclature Committee. J Bone Miner Res 1987; 2:595-610.
  23. Wiltfang J, Schultze-Mosgau S, Nkenke E, Thorwarth M, Neukam FW, Schlegel KA. Onlay augmentation versus sinuslift procedure in the treatment of the severely resorbed maxilla: a 5-year comparative longitudinal study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 34:885–9.
  24. Cha HS, Kim A, Nowzari H, Chang HS, Ahn KM. Simultaneous sinus lift and implant installation: prospective study of consecutive two hundred seventeen sinus lift and four hundred sixty-two implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014; 16:337–47.
  25. Baumans V. Environmental enrichment for laboratory rodents and rabbits: requirements of rodents, rabbits, and research. ILAR J. 2005; 46:162-70.
  26. Choi H, Park NJ, Jamiyandorj O, Choi KH, Hong MH, Oh S et al. Improvement of osteogenic potential of biphasic calcium phosphate bone substitute coated with two concentrations of expressed recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2012; 42:119-26.
  27. Kim JS, Kim JC, Na BK, Jeong JM, Song CY. Amniotic membrane patching promotes healing and inhibits proteinase activity on wound healing following acute corneal alkali burn. Exp Eye Res. 2000; 70:329- 37.
  28. Heiligenhaus A, Bauer D, Meller D, Steubl KP, Tseng SCG. Improvement of HSV-1 necrotizing keratitis with amniotic membrane transplantation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001; 42:1969-74.
  29. Loeffelbein DJ, Rohleder NH, Eddicks M, Baumann CM, Stoeckelhuber M, Wolff K, Drecoll E, Steinstraesser L, Hennerbichler S, Kesting MR. Evaluation of human amniotic membrane as a wound dressing for split-thickness skin-graft donor sites. BioMed Res Int. 2014; 2014:572-183.
  30. Azuara-Blanco A, Pillai CT, Dua HS. Amniotic membrane transplantation for ocular surface reconstruction. Br J Opthalmol. 1999; 83:399–402.
  31. Samandari M, Adibi S, Khoshzaban A, Aghazadeh S, Dihimi P, Torbaghan SS, Keshel SH, Shahabi Z. Human amniotic membrane, best healing accelerator, and the choice of bone induction for vestibuloplasty technique (an animal study). Transpalnt Res Risk Manage. 2011;3:1-8.
  32. In’t Anker PS, Scherjon SA, Kleijburg-van der Keur C, de Groot-Swings GMJS, Claas FHJ, Fibbe WE, Kanhai HHH. Isolation of mesenchymal stem cells of fetal or maternal origin from human placenta. Stem Cells. 2004; 22:1338-45.
  33. Kumar A, Chandra RV, Reddy AA, Reddy BH, Reddy C, Naveen A. Evaluation of clinical, antiinflammatory and antiinfective properties of amniotic membrane used for guided tissue regeneration: a randomized controlled trial. Dent Res J. 2015; 12:127.
  34. Faulk WP, Matthews R, Stevens PJ, Bennett JP, Burgos H, His BL. Human amnion as an adjunct in wound healing. Lancet. 1980; 1:1156-58.
  35. Rinastiti M, Harijadi AL, Santoso ALS, Sosroseno W. Histological evaluation of rabbit gingival wound healing transplanted with human amniotic membrane. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. March 1, 2006; 35:247-51.
  36. Koizumi N, Inamoto T, Sotozono T, Fullwood NJ, Quantock AJ, Kinosita S. Growth factors mRNA and proteins in preserved human amniotic membrane. Curr Eye Res. 1997; 20:173-7.
  37. Rote NS, Menon R, Swan KF, Lyden TW, Fortunato SJ. Expression of IL-1 and IL-6 protein and mRNA in amniochorionic membrane. Placenta. 1993; 14:A63.
  38. Kobayashi N, Kabuyama Y, Sasaki S, Kato K, Homma Y. Suppression of corneal neovascularization by culture supernatantof human amniotic cells. Cornea. 2002; 21:62-7.
  39. Shao C, Sima J, Zhang SX, Jin J, Reinach P, Wang Z, Ma JX. Suppression of corneal neovascularization by PEDF release from human amniotic membranes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004; 45:1758-62.
  40. Niknejad H, Yazdanpanah G. Opposing effect of amniotic membrane on angiogenesis originating from amniotic epithelial cells. J Med Hypo Ideas. 2014; 8:39- 41 
 

Statistics
Article View: 232
PDF Download: 497