Sinus Floor Elevation and Antrostomy Healing

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 537-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazushige Tanaka ◽  
Giovanna Iezzi ◽  
Adriano Piattelli ◽  
Mauro Ferri ◽  
Natalia Fortich Mesa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Sinus Floor

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 combined lateral-crestal approach of sinus floor elevation: A report on three cases

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xin Zhang ◽  
Yuting Zhang ◽  
Jian Wang ◽  
Qianbing Wan ◽  
Lei Li
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Conservative Treatment ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Clinical Report ◽  
Sinus Lift ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Sinus Floor

This clinical report describes a combined lateral-crestal approach to elevate the sinus floor when placing implants on a wide maxillary posterior ridge. The buccally enlarged osteotomy broadens vision of practitioners and facilitates access of instruments in the sinus. Compared to the traditional lateral approach of sinus lift, the proposed technique may offer a more conservative treatment modality. And a clinical study with sufficient subjects and long term follow up is needed to validate the potential and limitations of the proposed technique.

scholarly journals Influence of Anatomical Parameters on the Dimensions of the Subantral Space and Sinus Mucosa Thickening after Sinus Floor Elevation. A Retrospective Cone Beam Computed Tomography Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 76
Author(s):  
Yuki Omori ◽  
Yasushi Nakajima ◽  
Hideki Imai ◽  
Daichi Yonezawa ◽  
Mauro Ferri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cone Beam ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Axis Parallel ◽  
Height Gain ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Sinus Mucosa ◽  
Anatomical Parameters ◽  
Maxillary Sinuses

Background: Various anatomical parameters might influence the surgical approach for maxillary sinus floor elevation. The objective of the present study was to retrospectively evaluate the influence of anatomical parameters on the dimensions of the subantral space and of the sinus mucosa thickening after sinus floor elevation. Material and Methods: Seventy-eight maxillary sinuses in sixty-five patients were evaluated on cone beam computed tomographies taken before surgery and after one week (t1w) and nine months (t9m). Several parameters such as the distance XF between an axis parallel to the base of the nose (X-axes) and the sinus floor (F) were correlated with the height gain (IF) at t1w and t9m and the post-surgical edema. Results: A weak significant positive correlation was observed between height gain vs. sinus height of interest (XF), the balcony, and the sinus floor angle. The post-surgical edema was influenced by the initial mucosa thickness and the xenograft used. Conclusions: Various parameters might affect height gain and sinus mucosa thickening after sinus floor elevation. The height of interest, the balcony, and the sinus floor angle showed significant correlations with height gain. The initial thickness of the mucosa and the biomaterial used influenced the post-surgical edema.

scholarly journals Two-Year Follow-Up of 4-mm-Long Implants Used as Distal Support of Full-Arch FDPs Compared to 10-mm Implants Installed after Sinus Floor Elevation. A Randomized Clinical Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 3846
Author(s):  
Fabio Rossi ◽  
Lorenzo Tuci ◽  
Lorenzo Ferraioli ◽  
Emanuele Ricci ◽  
Andreea Suerica ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Test Group ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Relevant Difference ◽  
Short Implants ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Bone Level ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Distal Support ◽  
Augmentation Procedure

Background: In edentulous patients, bone resorption cannot allow the installation of standard implants and it is demanded to use short implants in the residual alveolar bone or longer implants in grafted bone. Aim: To compare the survival and bone level changes of standard plus short 4-mm implants used as distal support of a maxillary full-arch fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with standard (10-mm) implants placed in association with a bilateral sinus floor augmentation procedure. Material and Methods: Full-arch FDPs supported by six implants were randomly placed in both groups. In the control group, all implants were 10 mm long and 4.1 mm in diameter. The distal implant in both sides of the maxilla was installed after 4 months from bilaterally sinus floor elevation. In the test group (short group), the distal implant in both sides of the maxilla was 4 mm long and 4.1 mm in diameter. No sinus floor elevations were performed in the test group. Clinical assessments and X-rays were taken at prosthesis delivering and after 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were also evaluated before surgery and after 6, 12, and 24 months. Results: The changes over time of the bone level for the short implants were −0.01 ± 0.11 mm, −0.04 ± 0.13 mm, −0.17 ± 0.29 mm, and −0.28 ± 0.37 mm after 6, 12, 18, and 24 months from prosthesis delivering, respectively. For the standard implants, bone changes were −0.21 ± 0.33 mm (p = 0.103), −0.30 ± 0.32 mm (p = 0.023), −0.40 ± 0.37 mm (p = 0.144), and −0.54 ± 0.49 mm (p = 0.128), respectively. A statistically relevant difference was found only at 12 months after loading between the two groups. Conclusions: Similar results on implant survival rate and marginal bone loss were observed for the short and standard implants, placed in association with a bilateral sinus floor augmentation procedure, used as distal support of a maxillary full-arch FDP. A statistically relevant difference was found only at 12 months after loading between the two groups (p = 0.023).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document