PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate implants placed according to several methods of sinus floor augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight patients (median age of 62 years, range 23 to 89) had been treated at least 3 years prior to examination with screw-type implants in the posterior maxilla. Depending on the vertical dimension of the residual bone, 1 of 3 surgical procedures had been performed: sinus lift by lateral antrostomy (SL) in 13 patients; osteotome technique (OT) in 18 patients; standard implantation in 17 patients (control). In each patient 1 implant was randomly chosen for analysis (48 implants with a mean observation time of 4.6 +/- 1.4 years). Examination included probing pocket depth (PPD) measurement and radiographic examination. Radiographs were digitized to assess the marginal bone level. Differences between the groups were tested using analysis of variance, the Student t test and the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Mean PPD was 3.0 mm for the SL, 3.1 mm for OT, and 3.1 mm for control. The mean radiographic bone level was 1.53 mm for SL, 2.40 mm for OT, and 1.96 mm for control. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups for either of these parameters. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Clinical examinations as well as radiographically stable bone levels indicated similar biomechanical conditions for prosthetic restorations when applying the 3 surgical procedures tested.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate implants placed according to several methods of sinus floor augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight patients (median age of 62 years, range 23 to 89) had been treated at least 3 years prior to examination with screw-type implants in the posterior maxilla. Depending on the vertical dimension of the residual bone, 1 of 3 surgical procedures had been performed: sinus lift by lateral antrostomy (SL) in 13 patients; osteotome technique (OT) in 18 patients; standard implantation in 17 patients (control). In each patient 1 implant was randomly chosen for analysis (48 implants with a mean observation time of 4.6 +/- 1.4 years). Examination included probing pocket depth (PPD) measurement and radiographic examination. Radiographs were digitized to assess the marginal bone level. Differences between the groups were tested using analysis of variance, the Student t test and the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Mean PPD was 3.0 mm for the SL, 3.1 mm for OT, and 3.1 mm for control. The mean radiographic bone level was 1.53 mm for SL, 2.40 mm for OT, and 1.96 mm for control. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups for either of these parameters. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Clinical examinations as well as radiographically stable bone levels indicated similar biomechanical conditions for prosthetic restorations when applying the 3 surgical procedures tested.
Authors: Erica N Recker; Gustavo Avila-Ortiz; Carol L Fischer; Keyla Pagan-Rivera; Kim A Brogden; Deborah V Dawson; Satheesh Elangovan Journal: J Periodontol Date: 2014-09-30 Impact factor: 6.993
Authors: J Romero-Millán; F Hernández-Alfaro; M Peñarrocha-Diago; D Soto-Peñaloza; D Peñarrocha-Oltra; M-A Peñarrocha-Diago Journal: Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Date: 2018-11-01
Authors: Ronald E Jung; Marionna N Kovacs; Daniel S Thoma; Christoph H F Hämmerle Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2022-01-08 Impact factor: 5.021