Comparison of different sinus augmentation techniques for implant placements: An original research

Haripal Singh; Vini Kaila; G. Jeevan Kumar; Mohammed Ibrahim; Damarasingu Rajesh; Atul Aggarwal

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v6nS9.12712

Authors

Haripal Singh
hariranga5@gmail.com
Consultant Prosthodontist and Implatologist, Clinic Head, Tishlar Superspeciality Dental Clinic, New Delhi, India
Vini Kaila Senior lecturer, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram Andhra Pradesh
G. Jeevan Kumar Consultant Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh
Mohammed Ibrahim Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Damarasingu Rajesh OMFS, PhD Scholar, Dept of OMFS, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat
Atul Aggarwal Oral-Maxillofacial Surgeon and Implantologist, Senior lecturer, Surendra dental college & research institute, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan

Keywords:

atrophic maxilla, dental implants, lateral window sinus augmentation, transalveolar sinus augmentation

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of the present research was to evaluate various sinus augmentation techniques for implant placements. Methodology: Four techniques were evaluated: 1-stage bone-added osteotome sinus floor elevation procedure (BAOSFE) with simultaneous implant placement; 2-stage BAOSFE with delayed implant placement; 1-stage lateral window sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement; and 2-stage lateral window sinus floor elevation with delayed implant placement. Patients were followed for 18 to 72 months (mean: 52.5 months) after prosthesis placement. Data were analyzed with cone-beam computed tomography. Results: A total of 96 implants from 71 patients were analyzed; pre-treatment, there were no significant differences between patients. Total implant survival was 98.9%. The mean residual bone height was significantly higher in the 1-stage BAOSFE group than the other groups (P <.01); 1 implant in this group failed at 3 months. There was no significant difference in total bone height gain between groups. However, the bone height gain of 1st sinus lifting with 2-stage BAOSFE was significantly lower than the 2-stage lateral window procedure (P<.01). There was no prosthesis failure. Conclusion: The favorable implant outcomes suggest these 1-stage and 2-stage MSFA procedures should be considered as alternative treatment options for patients with extremely atrophic posterior maxilla.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Simon BI, Greenfield JL. Alternative to the gold standard for sinus augmentation: Osteotome sinus elevation. Quintessence International. Oct 2011;1:42(9).

Irinakis T, Dabuleanu V, Aldahlawi S. Complications during maxillary sinus augmentation associated with interfering septa: a new classification of septa. The open dentistry journal. 2017;11:140.

Steigmann M, Garg AK. A comparative study of bilateral sinus lift s performed with platelet rich plasma alone versus alloplastic graft material reconstituted with blood. Implant Dent 2005;14:261-6.

Linkow LI. Clinical evaluation of the various designed endosseous implants. J Oral Implant Transplant Surg 1966;12:35-46.

Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980;38:613-6.

Kent JN, Block MS. Simultaneous maxillary sinus fl oor bone graft ing and placement of hydroxylapatite-coated implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;47:238-42.

Jensen J, Simonsen EK, Sindet-Pedersen S. Reconstruction of the severely resorbed maxilla with bone grafting and osseointegrated implants: A preliminary report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:27-32.

Blomqvist JE, Alberius P, Isaksson S, Linde A, Obrant K. Importance of bone graft quality for implant integration aft er maxillary sinus reconstruction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998;86:268-74.

Jensen J, Sindet-Pedersen S. Autogenous mandibular bone graft s and osseointegrated implants for reconstruction of the severely atrophied maxilla: a preliminary report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:1277-87.

Hirsch JM, Ericsson I. Maxillary sinus augmentation using mandibular bone graft s and simultaneous installation of implants: A surgical technique. Clin Oral Implants Res 1991;2:91-6.

Jurisic M, Markovic A, Radulovic M, Brkovic BM, Sándor GK. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation: comparing osteotome with lateral window immediate and delayed implant placements. An interim report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106:820-7.

Block MS, Kent JN. Maxillary sinus grafting for totally and partially edentulous patients. J Am Dent Assoc 1993;124:139-43.

Momtaheni DM, Schweitzer K, Muenchinger F. Technique for stabilization of autogenous cancellous bone grafts in sinus lift procedures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;78:14-6.

Del Fabbro M, Testori T, Francetti L, Weinstein R. Systematic review of survival rates for implants placed in the graft ed maxillary sinus. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2004;24:565-77.

Block MS, Kent JN, Kallukaran FU, Th unthy K, Weinberg R. Bone maintenance 5 to 10 years aft er sinus grafting. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;56:706-14.

Summers RB. The osteotome technique: Part 4–Future site development. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1995;16:10901092 passim; 1094-1096, 1098, quiz 1099.

Rosen PS, Summers R, Mellado JR, et al. The bone-added osteotome sinus floor elevation technique: multicenter retrospective report of consecutively treated patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999; 14:853–8.

Chao YL, Chen HH, Mei CC, et al. Meta-regression analysis of the initial bone height for predicting implant survival rates of two sinus elevation procedures. J Clin Periodontol 2010;37:456–65.

Calin C, Petre A, Drafta S. Osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:558–76.

PA F. Augmentation of the posterior maxilla: a proposed hierarchy of treatment selection. J Periodontol 2003;74:1682–91.

Winter AA, Pollack AS, Odrich RB. Placement of implants in the severely atrophic posterior maxilla using localized management of the sinus floor: a preliminary study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:687–95.

Renouard F, Nisand D. Short implants in the severely resorbed maxilla: a 2-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7 (Suppl 1):S104–10.

Griffin TJ, Cheung WS. The use of short, wide implants in posterior areas with reduced bone height: a retrospective investigation. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:139–44.

Block MS, Delgado A, Fontenot MG. The effect of diameter and length of hydroxylapatite-coated dental implants on ultimate pullout force in dog alveolar bone. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:174–8.