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.

Effects of tobacco smoking on the survival rate of dental implants placed in areas of maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a systematic review

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 408-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandro Chambrone ◽  
Philip M. Preshaw ◽  
José D. Ferreira ◽  
José A. Rodrigues ◽  
Alessandra Cassoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Tobacco Smoking ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation

scholarly journals Surgeons’ Performance Determining the Amount of Graft Material for Sinus Floor Augmentation Using Tomography

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Dibo Cruz ◽  
Guilherme Alvares Peixoto ◽  
Marcelo Freitas Aguiar ◽  
Gabriela Alessandra Cruz Galhardo Camargo ◽  
Nicolas Homs
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Graft Material ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Computed Tomography Images ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation

Abstract This study aimed to assess the performance of surgeons in determining the amount of graft material required for maxillary sinus floor augmentation in a preoperative analysis using cone-beam computed tomography images. A convenience sample of 10 retrospective CBCT exams (i-CAT®) was selected. Scans of the posterior maxilla area with an absence of at least one tooth and residual alveolar bone with an up to 5 mm height were used. Templates (n=20) contained images of representative cross-sections in multiplanar view. Ten expert surgeons voluntarily participated as appraisers of the templates for grafting surgical planning of a 10 mm long implant. Appraisers could choose a better amount of graft material using scores: 0) when considered grafting unnecessary, 1) for 0.25 g in graft material, 2) for 0.50 g, 3) for 1.00 g and 4) for 1.50 g or more. Reliability of the response pattern was analyzed using Cronbach’s a. Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney tests were performed to compare scores. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate whether the volume of sinuses (mm3) influenced the choose of scores. In the reliability analysis, all values were low and the score distribution was independent of the volume of the maxillary sinuses (p>0.05), which did not influence choosing the amount of graft material. Surgeons were unreliable to determine the best amount of graft material for the maxillary sinus floor augmentation using only CBCT images. Surgeons require auxiliary diagnostic tools to measure the volume associated to CBCT exams in order to perform better.

scholarly journals A Novel Technique to Prevent the Sinus Membrane Collapse for Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation without Bone Graft: Technical Note

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Scarano ◽  
Francesco Carinci ◽  
Felice lorusso ◽  
Francesco Inchingolo
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Technical Note ◽  
Barrier Membrane ◽  
Sinus Cavity ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Maxillary Sinus Floor ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Without Bone Graft ◽  
Bone Tissue Formation

Abstract A variety of surgical techniques have been developed to reconstruct the posterior maxilla when bone volume is insufficient. A barrier membrane or bone window pushed inside the sinus cavity as the ‘‘roof’’ of the sinus cavity for preserve the space and help bone. The heterologous cortical lamina is used for the mechanical support, without any grafting material, of sinus membranes resulting in only bone tissue formation and not mixed with the graft.

scholarly journals Histological and Histomorphometric Analyses after Sinus Floor Augmentation with Different Grafting Materials

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luís Otávio Palhari
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinus ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Bone Matrix ◽  
Microscopic Analysis ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Osseointegrated Implants ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor Augmentation ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Grafting Materials

Homogeneous grafts from a bone bank, heterogeneous grafts and allow plastic grafts have already been studied and used for maxillary sinus elevation in order to reconstruct the bone for placement of dental implants. The present work aims to histologically assess bone neoformation from autogenous and heterogeneous (or xenogenous) bone grafts, in maxillary sinus lift surgery, an invasive technique. Six patients (total of 10 elevated maxillary sinuses) participated in the study with an alveolar bone remnant in the posterior region of the maxilla, less than 5mm, classification by Misch SA-4, evidenced through panoramic radiography. After a waiting period of tissue repair of 8 months, samples were collected and microscopic analysis was performed in 3 groups: autogenous group, Bio-Oss® group and Endobon® group. It was observed that the autogenous group has a statistically higher amount of bone matrix when compared to the other 2 groups. These did not differ from each other. The three types of grafts used promoted the expected new bone formation. Thus, one can choose any of the grafts evaluated to enable the installation of Osseointegrated implants and prosthetic rehabilitation in patients with the atrophic posterior maxilla.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document