A comparative study of dog models for osteotome sinus floor elevation and dental implants in posterior maxilla subjacent to the maxillary sinus

2013 ◽  
Vol 115 (3) ◽  
pp. e15-e20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizhou Liu ◽  
Fei Sun ◽  
Chendi Xu ◽  
Tingting Lin ◽  
Eryi Lu
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation

scholarly journals Maxillary Sinus Functions and Complications with Lateral Window and Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation Procedures Followed by Dental Implants Placement: A Retrospective Study in 60 Patients

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saad Al-Almaie ◽  
Abdul Majeed Kavarodi ◽  
Abdullah Al Faidhi
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Individual Risk ◽  
Radiographic Examination ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Modifying Factors ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation

ABSTRACT Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate retrospectively maxillary sinus functions and complications by using generally accepted diagnostic criteria with lateral window and osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) procedures followed by dental implants placement. Materials and methods A group of 60 patients in whom a SFE with the two procedures (lateral window and OSFE) followed by dental implants placement had been performed were evaluated retrospectively for sinus functions and complications from the time of procedure up to 24 months using a questionnaire, conventional clinical and radiographic examination. Results Number of patients suffered dizziness accompanied by nausea immediately after OSFE was more than the lateral window procedure and the symptoms disappeared within 2 to 4 weeks. Maxillary sinus membrane perforations occurred and small for 4 out of 79 procedures, two cases for OSFE and two for lateral window procedure had been repaired. No more complications had been detected for all the patients up to 24 months. Conclusion Based on the results of this study, SFE with lateral window and osteotome procedures followed by dental implants placement did not interfere with maxillary sinus function and no obvious complications had been detected up to 24 months. Clinical significance The clinician performs SFE with either lateral window or osteotome procedures needs to understand the difficulties and morbidity arising in the event of complications and must be able to correctly judge the individual risk and the presence of modifying factors that may cause these complications. How to cite this article Al-Almaie S, Kavarodi AM, Al Faidhi A. Maxillary Sinus Functions and Complications with Lateral Window and Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation Procedures Followed by Dental Implants Placement: A Retrospective Study in 60 Patients. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(3):405-413.

Axial Triangle of the Maxillary Sinus, and its Surgical Implication With the Position of Maxillary Sinus Septa During Sinus Floor Elevation: A CBCT Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-422
Author(s):  
Junho Jung ◽  
Jung Soo Park ◽  
Seoung-Jin Hong ◽  
Gyu-Tae Kim ◽  
Yong-Dae Kwon
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Lateral Sinus ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Sinus Wall ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Molar Region

The aim of this study was to measure the convexity of the lateral wall of the maxillary (Mx) sinus and identify the locational distribution of antral septa in relation to the zygomaticomaxillary buttress (ZMB), in order to suggest another anatomical consideration and surgical modification of sinus floor elevation procedures. This study was designed as a cross-sectional study, and a total of 134 patients and 161 sinuses containing edentulous alveolar ridges were analyzed. The angle between the anterior and lateral walls of the Mx sinus (lateral sinus angle [LSA]), and the angle between the midpalatal line and the anterior sinus wall (anterior sinus angle [ASA]) were measured. Mean LSAs and ASAs were 105.9° ± 9.86° and 58.4° ± 6.43°, respectively. No significant difference between left and right sides was found (LSA, P = .420; right = 105.5° ± 9.27°; left = 105.5° ± 9.27° and ASA, P = .564; right = 57.9° ± 6.80°; left = 58.8° ± 6.02°). The prevalence of septa was 37.3%, and it was most frequently noted in the second molar region (32.8%), followed by the first molar (20.9%), retromolar (16.4%), and second premolar regions (14.9%). Septa were most frequently located posterior to the ZMB (49.2%), while ZMB was mostly located in the first molar region (66.4%). Narrow LSAs may complicate the surgical approach to the posterior maxilla, especially when sinus elevation should be used in the second molar region. Considering the occasional presence of antral septa, membrane elevation may be complicated when a septum is encountered during the procedure. These results suggest that 3-dimensional examination of the convexity of the Mx sinus should be performed preoperatively to choose proper surgical techniques and minimize surgical complications.

A Sinus Floor Reaugmentation Technique Around an Apically Exposed Implant Into the Maxillary Sinus

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-217
Author(s):  
Daisuke Ueno ◽  
Noriko Banba ◽  
Akira Hasuike ◽  
Kazuhiko Ueda ◽  
Toshiro Kodama
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Treatment Option ◽  
Prolonged Treatment ◽  
Sinus Cavity ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Recovery Approach

Sinus floor augmentation (SFA) is the most predictable treatment option in the atrophic posterior maxilla. However, exposure of the apical implant body into the maxillary sinus cavity is an occasionally observed phenomenon after SFA. Although most penetrating dental implants remain completely asymptomatic, they may induce recurrent rhinosinusitis or implant loss. Removal of the implant should be considered if there is significant implant exposure that results in prolonged treatment and increased costs. This case report demonstrates a recovery approach using sinus floor reaugmentation without implant removal in a patient with an apically exposed implant into the maxillary sinus cavity.

scholarly journals The Human Amniotic Mesenchymal Stem Cells (hAMSCs) Improve the Implant Osseointegration and Bone Regeneration in Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation in Rabbits

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Lu Yin ◽  
Zhi-xuan Zhou ◽  
Ming Shen ◽  
Ning Chen ◽  
Fei Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Bone Volume ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Dental Implantation ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation

Insufficient bone height in the posterior maxilla is a challenging problem in dental implantation. Bio-Oss, though routinely used in maxillary sinus floor elevation (MSFE), is not osteoinductive. Human amniotic mesenchymal cells (hAMSCs) isolated from placental tissues have potential for multidifferentiation and immunomodulatory properties and can be easily obtained without the need for invasive procedures and without ethical concerns. This is the first study to use hAMSCs to improve implant osseointegration and bone regeneration after MSFE. Human AMSCs were loaded into a fibrin gel and injected into rabbit MSFE models. The rabbits were assigned to four groups (n=3 per group), i.e., the control group, the hAMSC group, the Bio-Oss group, and the hAMSC/Bio-Oss group. The animals were sacrificed at postsurgery for four and twelve weeks and evaluated by histology and immunohistochemistry. Bone volume, bone volume/tissue volume, bone-to-implant contact ratio, and vessel-like structures in the hAMSC/Bio-Oss group were significantly better than those in other groups in the peri-implant and augmented areas. Immunofluorescence staining showed that alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activities of two hAMSC groups were higher than those of the other two groups. Sequential fluorescent labeling was performed in all of the 12-week groups. Observations showed that hAMSCs accelerated mineralized deposition rates on implant surfaces and in bone-augmented areas. These data demonstrated that hAMSCs could enhance implant osseointegration and bone regeneration after MSFE and might be used to optimize dental implantation in the future.

scholarly journals Schneider Membrane Elevation in Presence of Sinus Septa: Anatomic Features and Surgical Management

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Beretta ◽  
Marco Cicciù ◽  
Ennio Bramanti ◽  
Carlo Maiorana
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Sinus Lift ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
The Right ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Gothic Arch

Maxillary sinus floor elevation via a lateral approach is a predictable technique to increase bone volume of the edentulous posterior maxilla and consequently for dental implants placement. The sinus floor is elevated and it can be augmented with either autologous or xenogeneic bone grafts following an opening bone window created on the facial buccal wall. Maxillary septa are walls of cortical bone within the maxillary sinus. The septa shape has been described as an inverted gothic arch arising from the inferior or lateral walls of the sinus and may even divide the sinus into two or more cavities. Some authors have reported a higher prevalence of septa in atrophic edentulous areas than in nonatrophic ones. Radiographic identification of these structures is important in order to perform the right design of the lateral window during sinus lift. Aim of this investigation is to highlight the correct steps for doing sinus lift surgery in presence of those anatomic variations. Clinicians should always perform clinical and radiographic diagnosis in order to avoid complications related to the sinus lift surgery.

scholarly journals Maxillary Sinus in Dental Implantology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolay Uzunov ◽  
Elena Bozhikova
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Bone Biology ◽  
Edentulous Patient ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Surgical Options ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation

Dental implants have significantly increased prosthetic options for the edentulous patient. Implant placement in the posterior maxilla may often be hampered due to anatomical limitations, inadequate height and width, and poor bone quality. After tooth extraction, three-dimensional physiological resorption and sinus expansion take place and reduce the volume of the alveolar ridge. The concomitant actions of alveolar atrophy and sinus pneumatization reconstruct the subantral alveolar segment into a low, shallow, and sloped ridge which is incapable to accommodate dental implants and bear the functional strains. Advanced maxillary resorption can be managed by several surgical options, the most popular of which is maxillary sinus floor elevation. The chapter discusses recent advancements in bone biology and biomechanics in the light of alveolar atrophy and the impact of anatomy on maxillary sinus floor elevation as a treatment modality for the partially or totally edentulous patient.

scholarly journals Displacement of the full body of a dental implant into the sinus space without membrane perforation and subsequent osseointegration: a case report

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
pp. 030006052110606
Author(s):  
Xun Xia ◽  
Zhen-Yu Wei ◽  
Hong-Wu Wei
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Membrane Perforation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Bone Height ◽  
Implant Displacement

An increasing number of studies have investigated the use of osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) with simultaneous implant placement for maxillary sinus floor residual bone height (RBH) <4 mm. Many studies have reported good clinical results, but very few have reported complications related to this procedure. Here, the case of a 50-year-old female patient with an RBH in the left upper posterior region of 1–4 mm, who underwent OSFE with simultaneous placement of three Bicon short® implants, is described. One of the implants was found to be displaced during the second-stage surgery. The displaced implant was removed using piezosurgery, OSFE with simultaneous implant placement was repeated, and the missing tooth was reconstructed 6 months later. This case suggests that OSFE with simultaneous implant placement is feasible for severely atrophic maxillary sinus floor, but carries a risk of implant displacement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document