What Is the Most Effective Rehabilitation Method for Posterior Maxillas With 4 to 8 mm of Residual Alveolar Bone Height Below the Maxillary Sinus With Implant-Supported Prostheses? A Frequentist Network Meta-Analysis (original) (raw)
Related papers
Comparison of different sinus augmentation techniques for implant placements
International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS), 2022
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 1675 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.
Objective: To compare short implants in the posterior maxilla to longer implants placed after or simultaneously with sinus floor elevation procedures. The focused question was as follows: Are short implants superior to longer implants in the augmented sinus in terms of survival and complication rates of implants and reconstructions, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and costs? Methods: A MEDLINE search (1990–2014) was performed for randomized controlled clinical studies comparing short implants (≤8 mm) to longer implants (>8 mm) in augmented sinus. The search was complimented by an additional hand search of the selected papers and reviews published between 2011 and 2014. Eligible studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria, and quality assessments were conducted. Descriptive statistics were applied for a number of outcome measures.
Journal of dentistry, 2015
The aim of the present long-term study was to retrospectively evaluate the survival rate of implants placed in regenerated maxillary sinuses and to assess the influence of hypothetical predictors of implant failure. A database including 218 patients who received dental implants after sinus lift procedures was analyzed. The following variables were systematically included and evaluated: type of graft material used, number of surgeries performed, and use of membranes to cover the lateral antrostomy and/or to repair accidental Schneiderian membrane perforations. The Kaplan-Meier estimator was used for comparisons among the groups. A total of 589 dental implants were positioned in 246 grafted sinuses and were in function for 3-186 months. The Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival rate was 98.3% after 15.5 years of follow-up. All implant losses occurred within 52 months (4.3 years) after augmentation. According to the log-rank test, no statistically significant difference was shown between ea...
Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2015
The question whether a minimal maxillary residual bone height (RBH) allows the predictable use of osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) remains unresolved. To evaluate the efficacy of short implants placed with OSFE in an RBH of ≤4 mm and to compare bone levels around implants placed with (control) or without (test) grafting after 3 years. Eight-millimeter implants were placed by OSFE in sinuses randomized to receive anorganic bovine bone or no grafting material. Healing time before prosthetic rehabilitation was 10 weeks. Peri-implant bone levels were measured on standardized periapical radiographs. Thirty-seven implants (17 test, 20 control) were placed at a mean RBH of 2.4 ± 0.9 mm. Three implants failed during the 3-year follow-up. After 3 years, all implants had gained endosinus bone (test: 4.1 ± 1.0 mm; control: 5.1 ± 1.2 mm; p = .001). Mean bone gain was stable between 1 and 3 years in both groups. Grafting is unnecessary to achieve bone augmentation of 4.1 mm; however, more ...
Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation: a Review of Selected Treatment Modalities J Oral Maxillofac Res
Objectives: The objective of the present study is to present the current best evidence for enhancement of the vertical alveolar bone height and oral rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla with dental implants and propose some evidence-based treatment guidelines. Material and Methods: A comprehensive review of the English literature including MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library search was conducted assessing the final implant treatment outcome after oral rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla with dental implants. No year of publication restriction was applied. The clinical, radiological and histomorphometric outcome as well as complications are presented after maxillary sinus floor augmentation applying the lateral window technique with a graft material, maxillary sinus membrane elevation without a graft material and osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation with or without the use of a graft material. Results: High implant survival rate and new bone formation was reported with the three treatment modalities. Perforation of the Schneiderian membrane was the most common complication, but the final implant treatment outcome was not influenced by a Schneiderian membrane perforation. Conclusions: The different surgical techniques for enhancement of the vertical alveolar bone height in the posterior part of the maxilla revealed high implant survival with a low incidence of complications. However, the indication for the various surgical techniques is not strictly equivalent and the treatment choice should be based on a careful evaluation of the individual case. Moreover, further high evidence-based and well reported long-term studies are needed before one treatment modality might be considered superior to another.
Comparative study of immediately inserted dental implants in sinus lift: 24 months of follow-up
Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery, 2014
The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the success rate of immediately inserted dental implants in sinus lift and the secondary aim is to assess the reliability of performing simultaneous surgery for sinus lift, grafting and implant placement in situations of very low residual bone heights (<4 mm) in the posterior maxillae. Materials and Methods: A series of consecutive patients who sought dental implant rehabilitation were included in this study. The sinus lift cases were selected and divided into two groups based on the maxillary alveolar height, ≥4 mm of radiographically measurable bone height (Group 1) and < 4 mm of bone height (Group 2). Results: A total of 13 implants were installed in Group 1, whereas 8 implants were installed in Group 2. The success rate for dental implants in the sinus lifts reached 95.2% after a period of 24 months of evaluation, at 100% for Group 1 (bone height ≥ 4 mm) and 87.5% for Group 2 (bone height with < 4 mm). Besides the differences between the percentages of success, statistical differences were not reached when the groups were compared (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.38). Conclusions: Despite the limitations of this study, including its low number of participants, the results indicate that simultaneous surgery for sinus lifting, grafting and dental implants in posterior maxillae with very low bone heights (<4 mm) can be performed safely, although with lower success rates than found in patients with higher residual bone heights (>4 mm).
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2021
Bone resorption in the posterior maxilla starts immediately after tooth loss, and with time, bone dimensions become challenging for implantsupported restorations. 1 In these situations, implant placement is still a reliable option, but an extra concern is added to the treatment plan. To overcome the lack of bone height and width, bone grafting associated with sinus floor elevation (SFE), zygomatic implants, pterygoid implants, and angulated implants can be used. 2 However, bone grafting techniques still present high cost, complex surgical procedure, and high complication rates. 3-6 Short implants are an alternative approach as they represent a less invasive procedure with no need for bone grafting, no increase in complications or peri-implant Support provided in part by CAPES Finance Code 001 and #88881.187933/2018-01 and #88887.355598/2019-00. TPC is partially founded by National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq-Brazil). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.
Sinus elevation with short implant
2017
Two main options have been proposed to lift the Schneiderian membrane and then create some space to place implants: the lateral approach that increases treatment-related costs, postoperative morbidity and also surgical time, and the osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) firstly introduced in 1986 by Tatum. Then in 1994 Summers introduced the maxillary sinus lifting internal sinus lift (ISL) technique by the use of osteotomes, in which bone is added to the apical part of the implant to improve implant primary stability.2,3 This technique was shown to be less invasive, less time consuming and reduces postoperative discomfort to the patient. ISL is indicated when residual bone height (RBH) is between 5 and 7 mm. Other authors perform ISL in RBH extreme conditions such as ≤ 4 mm.4 There’s an increasing debate whether a bone graft is needed into the elevated area to maintain the space for new bone formation in the future. According to Summers’ original report, autogenous, allogenic or x...
Sinus Floor Augmentation With Simultaneous Implant Placement in the Severely Atrophic Maxilla
Journal of Periodontology, 1998
Background: Sinus augmentation with simultaneous implant placement without bone graft material is a hotly debated technique. This technique could be improved and secured by the use of an autologous leukocyte-and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) (Choukroun's technique) concentrate. The objectives of this study were to assess the relevance of PRF clots and membranes as the sole filling material during a lateral sinus lift with immediate implantation using radiologic and histologic analyses in a case series.
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1902 Jop 2007 070175, 2007
Background: A one-stage surgical technique has been adopted that allows simultaneous implant placement in as little as 1 to 2 mm of residual bone. The aim of this retrospective study was to describe results and complications in sinus augmentation of severely atrophic edentulous maxillae in patients with 1 to 3 mm residual bone height and compare them to a group of patients treated following the standard protocol with residual bone height >4 mm. Methods: The study consisted of a study group (N = 25) and a control group (N = 30). All patients were consecutive admissions treated for one-stage sinus augmentation by one surgeon during the years 2001 to 2005. Patients' medical files were reviewed mainly regarding operative technical problems and complications. Results: Included in the study were 60 sinuses and 164 simultaneous implants placed in grafted maxillary sinuses. Eight implants failed, seven of which were in the study group; three were in heavy smokers with residual bone of 1 to 3 mm. The success rate was 92% for the study group and 98.7% for the control group. A borderline statistically significant difference was found in the success rates between the groups using the Fisher exact test (P = 0.069). Conclusion: Sinus augmentation with simultaneous implant placement can be used to treat the atrophic maxilla in patients with 1 to 3 mm of vertical residual bone height when careful case planning and surgical techniques are used.