Extra-Short Implants with Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation: A Prospective Clinical Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 415-422
Author(s):  
Nejat Nizam ◽  
Önder Gürlek ◽  
Mehmet Kaval
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Prospective Clinical Study ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Short Implants ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation

Importance of ENT assessment in stratifying candidates for sinus floor elevation: a prospective clinical study

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 57-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Torretta ◽  
Mario Mantovani ◽  
Tiziano Testori ◽  
Maurizio Cappadona ◽  
Lorenzo Pignataro
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Prospective Clinical Study ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Sinus Floor

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 Osteotome sinus floor elevation with or without grafting: a 3-year randomized controlled clinical trial

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 396-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mi-si Si ◽  
Long-fei Zhuang ◽  
Ying-Xin Gu ◽  
Jia-ji Mo ◽  
Shi-chong Qiao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation

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).

scholarly journals Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation Without Grafting

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 439-444
Author(s):  
Semaan Abi Najm ◽  
Nathalie Nurdin ◽  
Marc El Hage ◽  
Mark Bischof ◽  
Rabah Nedir
Keyword(s):  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document