Non-grafted versus grafted sinus lift procedures for implantation in the atrophic maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Maxillary sinus lift augmentation: A randomized clinical trial with histological data comparing deproteinized bovine bone grafting vs graftless procedure with a 5-12-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Different protocols and procedures for sinus lift and implant placement are available, generally involving the use of grafts to increase the tissue volume and/or prevent the Schneiderian membrane from collapsing. Among xenografts, deproteinised bovine bone graft (DBBP) is frequently used in sinus lift procedures. Leaving an ungrafted space following membrane elevation has proven to have a bony regenerative potential as well. This study aimed to compare the clinical and histological features of sinus lift surgery performed with or without biomaterials.

METHODS

Patients with severe maxillary posterior atrophy (residual bone height 2-6 mm and residual crest thickness ≥4 mm), and in need of sinus lift surgery to allow the placement of three implants were enrolled and randomly divided into two groups. They underwent sinus lifts with DBBP (control) or with a graftless technique (test) and immediate placement of two implants (a mesial and distal one). After 6 months, a bone sample was retrieved from the area between the previously inserted fixtures, and a third, central implant was placed. The collected bone samples were analyzed morphologically and histomorphometrically. The patients were provided with prosthetic restorations after 6 months and followed up for 5-12 years.

RESULTS

Ten patients were enrolled in the test and nine in the control group. The 6-month follow-up showed in the control group an average augmentation of 10.31 mm (±2.12), while in the test group it was 8.5 mm (±1.41) and a success rate of 96.3% in the control and 86.7% in the test group (p > 0.05). The histological analysis evidenced the presence of new bone tissue surrounded by immature osteoid matrix in the test group, and a variable number of DBBP particles surrounded by an immature woven bone matrix in the control group.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present trial indicate that, with residual bone height of 2-6 mm and residual crest thickness ≥4 mm, sinus lift surgery with or without biomaterials followed by implant restoration, produces similar clinical and histological outcomes.

Additive Manufacturing Titanium Dental Implants Placed in Sinuses Grafted with 70HA:30-TCP: A One-Year Retrospective Study for Evaluation of Survival Rate

The present short-term retrospective study evaluated the implant survival rate and peri-implant bone loss around additive-manufactured titanium implants placed in sinuses grafted with Plenum Osshp (Plenum Bioengenharia, Jundia, SP, Brazil) (70HA:30β-TCP) material. A total of 39 implants were inserted after 23 sinus floor elevation procedures in 16 consecutive patients. Prosthetic rehabilitation included fixed partial prostheses (three units), single crowns (eleven units), and fixed full arches (three units). Clinical and radiographic parameters of implant-supported restorations were evaluated after at least one year of occlusal loading. The implant-crown success criteria included the absence of pain, suppuration, and clinical mobility, an average distance between the implant shoulder and the first visible bone contact (DIB) < 1.0 mm from the initial surgery, and the absence of prosthetic complications at the implant-abutment interface. The overall cumulative implant survival rate was 97.43%. No prosthetic complications at the implant-abutment interface were reported. After one year, the mean DIB was 0.23 mm ± 0.14. Within the limits of this retrospective study, it can be concluded that 70 HA:30 β-TCP allowed stable and reliable bone support to maintain healthy conditions around titanium dental implants produced by additive manufacturing.

Isolation, identification and osteogenic capability analysis of mesenchymal stem cells derived from different layers of human maxillary sinus membrane

AIM

To discover the populations of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) derived from different layers of human maxillary sinus membrane (hMSM) and evaluate their osteogenic capability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

hMSM was isolated into a monolayer using the combined method of physical separation and enzymatic digestion. The localization of MSCs in hMSM was performed by immunohistological staining and other techniques. Lamina propria layer-derived MSCs (LMSCs) and periosteum layer-derived MSCs (PMSCs) from hMSM were expanded using the explant cell culture method and identified by multilineage differentiation assays, colony formation assay, flow cytometry and so on. The biological characteristics of LMSCs and PMSCs were compared using RNA sequencing, reverse transcription and quantitative polymerase chain reaction, immunofluorescence staining, transwell assay, western blotting and so forth.

RESULTS

LMSCs and PMSCs from hMSMs were both CD73-, CD90- and CD105-positive, and CD34-, CD45- and HLA-DR-negative. LMSCs and PMSCs were identified as CD171+/CD90+ and CD171-/CD90+, respectively. LMSCs displayed stronger proliferation capability than PMSCs, and PMSCs presented stronger osteogenic differentiation capability than LMSCs. Moreover, PMSCs could recruit and promote osteogenic differentiation of LMSCs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified and isolated two different types of MSCs from hMSMs. Both MSCs served as good potential candidates for bone regeneration.

Masticatory function in edentulous patients wearing implant overdentures after graftless maxillary sinus membrane elevation

BACKGROUND

Graftless sinus floor augmentation shows good results in bone gain, radiology and implant survival. Clinically, this technique can be recommended as an alternative to conventional procedures using augmentation materials.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to assess masticatory performance, masticatory ability and patient satisfaction after graftless sinus floor augmentation.

METHODS

The study group consisted of patients who had received a graftless sinus lift procedure in a split-mouth design and was compared to patients with maxillary implant-supported overdentures without augmentation and a natural dentition group. To assess objective masticatory performance, the mixing ability test was performed. Three questionnaires were used to assess patient reported outcomes related to mastication and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Each group included ten patients. Both the graftless sinus lift group and the edentulous control group had a worse masticatory performance compared to the natural dentition group. Masticatory ability, measured by patient reported outcomes, was not different between the graftless sinus floor augmentation group and implant-retained overdentures group without augmentation, but the natural dentition group showed better results. Thereby, the better the masticatory performance in patients with a graftless sinus membrane elevation the better the patient satisfaction for 'prosthesis', 'appearance of prostheses', 'speech' and 'mastication and eating'.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with implant-supported overdentures show inferior masticatory function compared to those with natural dentition. There were no significant differences in masticatory performance between patients with implant-retained overdentures, with or without graftless augmentation. The decision on the preferred procedure should consider additional factors such as anatomical, surgical-technical aspects and patient's preferences.

Effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation for the atrophic edentulous maxilla: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atrophic edentulous maxilla is a debilitating condition caused by the progressive and irreversible bone resorption following loss of teeth, that results in bone of inadequate volume and density. This makes conventional implant therapy extremely challenging without complex reconstructive procedures. Several techniques such as sinus augmentation, short implants, and tilted implants have been used for the rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla. In recent years, zygomatic implants have emerged as a graftless rehabilitation technique. However, few studies compare zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation with other fixed rehabilitation techniques. The existing body of evidence on zygomatic implants is largely based on clinical and disease-oriented outcomes.

METHODS

A network meta-analysis (NMA) will be conducted in order to compare the effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation with the other rehabilitation techniques. Experimental and observational studies comparing different implant-assisted fixed rehabilitation in adults with atrophic maxilla will be included. The primary and secondary outcomes will be patient's satisfaction and quality of life respectively. Additional outcomes include the implant's survival/success, and biological and prosthetic complications. An electronic search will be performed through various databases for articles in English and French, without time limits. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized controlled trials, and ROBINS-I for non-randomized and observational studies. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts and extract data. Any discrepancy between reviewers will be discussed and resolved through consensus or with the help of a third reviewer. Pairwise meta-analyses will be performed using a random effects model. I2, τ2, transitivity, subgroup/meta-regression analyses will assess and explain heterogeneity and distribution of effect modifiers. A network plot will be created to connect the different interventions directly and indirectly. Interventions will be ranked using the surface under cumulative ranking curve. Confidence in the results of the NMA will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

DISCUSSION

This study will be the first to assess the effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation for the atrophic maxilla using NMA. The evidence obtained will aid clinical decision-making and will advance the knowledge of the rehabilitation techniques for the atrophic maxilla.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023353303.

Implant stability and clinical outcome between implant placement using internal sinus floor elevation with alloplastic bone material grafting and without grafting: A 1-year randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare implant stability and clinical outcome in implant placement between osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) with biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) which consisted of 30% of hydroxyapatite (HA) and 70% of beta-tricalcium phosphate (β -TCP) grafting material and OSFE without using bone grafting material. The research questions is whether the BCP provides any benefit in OSFE or not.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients (30 implants) with a single edentulous area of upper premolar or molar were randomly separated into OSFE with BCP (n = 15) and OSFE without grafting (n = 15). The patients were reevaluated 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after implant loading. The clinical assessments (implant stability quotient (ISQ), implant survival-failure rate, and surgical complication) were analyzed. Together with radiographic assessments in 2D (endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG), mean marginal bone change (MMBC)) and 3D (endo-sinus bone gain in CBCT (ESBG-CT)) were evaluated, with a mean follow-up time of at least 12 months of functional loading and prosthetic complication.

RESULTS

20 remaining implants (OSFE with BCP, n = 10; OSFE without grafting, n = 10) were analyzed. Mean ISQ was 79.18 ± 3.43 in 1-year follow-up (ISQ; OSFE with BCP = 78.72 ± 3.46, OSFE without grafting = 79.65 ± 3.52). ISQ in both groups increased steadily without significant differences in each follow-up. (p = 0.56). In radiographic evaluation, at 6-, 9-, and 12-month, OSFE without grafting group showed statistically significant lower MMBC (p < 0.05). The 1-year clinical results showed that 2 implants failed in OSFE with BCP, and 1 implant failed in OSFE without grafting.

CONCLUSIONS

Graft material "BCP" (HA30:TCP70) coupled with OSFE presents no extraordinary benefit in implant stability, clinical and radiographic outcome in 1-year follow-up.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Clinically, OSFE with grafting materials provides no additional benefit.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

TCTR20210517008 (date of registration: May 17, 2021).

Endo-sinus bone gain following sinus membrane elevation without graft compared with sinus floor augmentation and a composite graft: a one-year single-blind randomized controlled trial

The objective of this study was to assess endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG) and bone density (BD) following maxillary sinus membrane elevation without graft (test) compared with maxillary sinus floor augmentation and 1:1 ratio of autogenous bone from the buccal antrostomy and deproteinized porcine bone mineral (control) using two- and three-dimensional radiographic methods. Forty healthy patients were randomly allocated to the test and control groups. Cone beam computed tomography scans were obtained at enrolment (T0), immediately after surgery (T1), at delivery of the prosthetic rehabilitation (T2), and 1 year after functional implant loading (T3). Mean differences were expressed with the 95% confidence interval. Significance was set at ≤ 0.05. ESBG and BD were significantly higher in the control group than test group at T1, T2, and T3 (P < 0.001). A significant decrease in ESBG and increase in BD was observed from T1 to T3 with both treatments (P < 0.001). There was a non-significant positive correlation of ESBG with implant protrusion length and non-significant negative correlation with residual bone height. In conclusion, test was associated with significantly lower ESBG and BD compared with control. However, the lower ESBG and BD did not appear to negatively affect the implant stability quotient or implant treatment outcome after 1 year of functional implant loading.

Clinical evaluation of maxillary sinus floor elevation with or without bone grafts: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials with trial sequential analysis

Introduction

Our goal was to systematically review the current evidence comparing the relative effectiveness of two maxillary sinus floor elevation (MSFE) approaches (internal and external) without bone grafts with that of conventional/grafted MSFE in patients undergoing implantation in the posterior maxilla.

Material and methods

Medical databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were searched for randomised controlled trials published between January 1980 and May 2023. A manual search of implant-related journals was also performed. Studies published in English that reported the clinical outcomes of MSFE with or without bone material were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook Risk Assessment Tool. Meta-analyses and trial sequence analyses were performed on the included trials. Meta-regression analysis was performed using pre-selected covariates to account for substantial heterogeneity. The certainty of evidence for clinical outcomes was assessed using GRADEpro GDT online (Guideline Development Tool).

Results

Seventeen studies, including 547 sinuses and 696 implants, were pooled for the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between MSFE without bone grafts and conventional MSFE in terms of the implant survival rate in the short term (n = 11, I2 = 0%, risk difference (RD): 0.03, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.01-0.07, p = 0.17, required information size (RIS) = 307). Although conventional MSFE had a higher endo-sinus bone gain (n = 13, I2 = 89%, weighted mean difference (WMD): -1.24, 95% CI: -1.91- -0.57, p = 0.0003, RIS = 461), this was not a determining factor in implant survival. No difference in perforation (n = 13, I2 = 0%, RD = 0.03, 95% CI: -0.02-0.09, p = 0.99, RIS = 223) and marginal bone loss (n = 4, I2 = 0%, WMD = 0.05, 95% CI: -0.14-0.23, p = 0.62, no RIS) was detected between the two groups using meta-analysis. The pooled results of the implant stability quotient between the two groups were not robust on sensitivity analysis. Because of the limited studies reporting on the visual analogue scale, surgical time, treatment costs, and bone density, qualitative analysis was conducted for these outcomes.

Conclusions

This systematic review revealed that both non-graft and grafted MSFE had high implant survival rates. Owing to the moderate strength of the evidence and short-term follow-up, the results should be interpreted with caution.

The Use of Allograft Bone in the Lateral Approach of Sinus Floor Elevation: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies

Background and Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficiency of using allografts for sinus lift. Materials and Methods: This systematic review was written under the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and recommendation of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Three electronic databases were screened until October 2023. The risk of bias was assessed according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed for median bone volume and implant survival rate. Results: From 321 articles retrieved, 7 articles were included in this review. A comparison between freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) and deproteinized bovine bone (DBB) for mean bone volume indicated a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.17 [-0.69, 0.36] (95% confidence interval (CI)), p = 0.53. For implant survival rate, a comparison was made between FDBA and autogenous bone indicating a risk ratio (RR) of 1.00 [0.96, 1.05] (95% CI), p = 1.00. Conclusions: The available evidence suggested that allograft bone can be used in sinus lift procedures. The results obtained are insufficient to compare with other types of bone graft, requiring a longer follow-up time. Future clinical trials are needed in order to evaluate the advantages of using allograft bone.

Maxillary sinus membrane elevation and coagulum compared with maxillary sinus floor augmentation and a composite graft: A 1-year single-blinded randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate the 1-year implant outcome and patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) after maxillary sinus membrane elevation and coagulum (test) compared with maxillary sinus floor augmentation and a 1:1 ratio of autogenous bone graft from the buccal antrostomy and deproteinised porcine bone mineral (DPBM) (control).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty patients (30 female, 10 male) with a mean age of 50 years (range 25-71 years) and an alveolar ridge height between 4 and 7 mm were randomly allocated to test or control. Outcome measures included survival of suprastructures and implants, implant stability quotient, health status of the peri-implant tissue, peri-implant marginal bone loss, frequency of complications and PROMs using Oral Health Impact Profile-14 combined with questionnaires assessing patient's perception of the peri-implant soft tissue, implant crown, function of the implant, and total implant treatment outcome using visual analogue scale. Mean differences were expressed with standard deviation and 95% confidence interval. Level of significance was 0.05.

RESULTS

All suprastructures and implants were well-functioning after 1-year of functional implant loading. No significant difference in any of the applied outcome measures was observed between test and control. Both treatments revealed high patient satisfaction scores and significant improvement in oral health-related quality of life.

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences in implant outcome and PROMs between test and control, after 1-year of functional implant loading. Neither of the treatments can therefore be considered better than the other. Thus, long-term randomized controlled trials are needed before definitive conclusions can be provided about the two treatment modalities.

Two-Step Progressive Transcrestal Sinus Augmentation Using a 4.5 mm Unloaded Implant as a "Temporary Implant" in Highly Atrophic Ridge: Case Report

Severe atrophic posterior maxillary ridge (residual bone height < 3 mm) could be a challenging situation to place dental implants. Several treatment options have been proposed, but some of them may require advanced surgical skills to achieve best results. In this article, we present a novel and easier technique to allow implant placing in localized areas of severe atrophy. In a first step, a 4.5-length extra-short (unloaded) implant is placed after a transcrestal maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA). After the gained apical bone consolidation, this "temporary implant" is atraumatically removed and a longer and wider definitive implant is placed to support the definitive single restoration. The case of a 45-year-old female treated with this approach is also presented. The patient suffered a severe resorption in the upper right molar area after a tooth extraction. Four months after the "temporary implant" placement and MSFA grafting with plasma rich in growth factors and autologous bone, 3 mm of dense apical bone gain could be observed. In a second surgical time, the 4.5 mm-length "temporary implant" was removed, and a 5.5 mm-length "definitive implant" was placed. This second implant was placed in a denser type 1 (1,000 Hounsfield Unit) new formed apical bone. Four months later, the implant was loaded with a screw-retained crown over a transepithelial (intermediate abutment). After 1-year follow-up, the implant was in health and no mechanical or biological complications were noticed. The satisfactory results of this case encourage the realization of new studies to elucidate its reproducibility.

Predictors of peri-implant bone remodeling outcomes after the osteotome sinus floor elevation: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the radiographic outcomes of implants after osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE), and further identify the separate predictors for these radiographic outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, a total of 187 implants were inserted into 138 patients using the OSFE technique. Seventy-four patients in the grafted group, and 64 patients in the non-grafted group completed this study. The vertical bone gain (VBG) and marginal bone loss (MBL) at 3 years following surgery were assessed as outcome variables. Based on extensive literature results, variables considered potential predictors of outcome variables included sex, age, tooth position, implant length, implant diameter, with or without grafting materials, residual bone height, sinus width, bone density, and sinus membrane thickness. Subsequently, the binary logistic regression analysis was applied with VBG and MBL as dependent variables, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) with its area under the curve (AUC) was performed to further determine the predictive value of these predictors.

RESULTS

One hundred and six implants in grafted group and 81 implants in the non-grafted group were analyzed. The average VBG was 2.12 ± 1.94 mm for the grafted group and 0.44 ± 1.01 mm for the non-grafted group at 3 years (P < 0.05). The mean MBL was 1.54 ± 1.42 mm for the grafted group and 1.13 ± 1.69 mm for the non-grafted group at 3 years (P > 0.05). After the adjustment for confounders, logistic regression analysis demonstrated that implant length, grafting, residual bone height, and sinus membrane thickness were predictors of VBG. The odds ratio for VBG was 3.90, 4.04, 4.13 and 2.62, respectively. Furthermore, grafting exhibited the largest AUC at 0.80. While tooth position and implant length were predictors of MBL, the odds ratio for MBL was 3.27 and 7.85, respectively. Meanwhile, implant length exhibited the largest AUC at 0.72.

CONCLUSIONS

OSFE with or without simultaneous grafting materials both showed predictable clinical outcomes. Additionally, the present study is the first quantitative and significant verification that VBG has a significant association with sinus membrane thickness, as well as residual bone height, implant length and grafting. Whereas tooth position and implant length are markedly associated with MBL.

Healing Patterns of Non-Collagenated Bovine and Collagenated Porcine Xenografts Used for Sinus Floor Elevation: A Histological Study in Rabbits

Objective: To compare healing of collagenated and non-collagenated xenografts used for maxillary sinus floor elevation. Materials and Methods: Two different xenografts were used: deproteinized bovine bone (DBBM group) and collagenated corticocancellous porcine bone (collagenated group). Healing was studied after 2, 4, and 8 weeks. The loss of dimensions of the elevated area and the percentages of new bone, xenograft remnants, osteoclastic zones, vessels, inflammatory infiltrates, and soft tissues were analyzed. Three regions were evaluated: close to the bone walls (bone wall region), subjacent the sinus mucosa (submucosa region), and the center of the elevated area (middle region). The primary variables were the percentage of new bone and xenograft remnants. Results: Between 2 and 8 weeks, the elevated areas showed a reduction of 16.3% and 52.2% in the DBBM and collagenated groups, respectively (p < 0.01 between the two areas after 8 weeks). After 8 weeks, the highest content of new bone was observed in the bone wall region, which was higher in the collagenated group than in the DBBM group (41.6% and 28.6%, respectively; p < 0.01). A similar quantity of new bone was found between the two groups in other regions. A higher percentage of vessels in all regions evaluated (p < 0.01) and soft tissue in the sub-mucosa region (p < 0.05) was found in the collagenated group than in the DBBM group. Conclusions: The present study showed that both xenografts allowed new bone formation. In comparison with the non-collagenated xenograft, the collagenated xenograft underwent higher resorption, resulting in greater shrinkage of the elevated space after sinus lifting and a higher content of new bone in the regions close to the bone walls. Clinical relevance: In this study, the region adjacent to the bone wall showed the highest new bone content. This region resembles the base of the sinus, closest to the sinus floor and walls, and is the most important region from a clinical point of view because it is where the implant will be installed. Residues of the biomaterial remained after 8 weeks of healing. Other reports have shown that these biomaterial residues may interfere with the integration of implants.

The bone lid technique in lateral sinus lift: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

This systematic review aimed at assessing the effect of the repositioned bone lid on bone augmentation in lateral sinus lift in pre-clinical in vivo and clinical studies. Secondary aims were to report on the healing of the bone window and to assess the implant survival rate.

Material and methods

Animal and human studies comparing lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation in combination or not with the repositioned bone lid were retrieved from MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science and Cochrane online library. Studies published in English up to April 2022 and reporting on histological and/or radiographic outcomes were considered. Case reports, case series and reviews were excluded. A hand search was also conducted. Risk of bias was assessed and meta-analysis performed to investigate the effect of the bone lid on new bone formation.

Results

After screening, 5 animal studies (4 in rabbits, 1 in sheep) and 2 clinical studies (1 RCT, 1 case–control) were included. Meta-analysis confirmed a higher new bone formation in rabbits at 2 and 8 weeks using the bone lid. The two clinical studies investigated lateral sinus lift with concomitant implant placement and reported similar results and high short-term implant success rate in both test and control groups.

Conclusions

The meta-analysis provided moderate evidence that the repositioned bone lid favored the formation of new bone to a higher extent as compared to resorbable membranes in animal studies. Implant success seems not to be influenced by the technique in the short term.

Tilted Implants and Sinus Floor Elevation Techniques Compared in Posterior Edentulous Maxilla: A Retrospective Clinical Study over Four Years of Follow-Up

The aim of this study was to evaluate the implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, and surgical and prosthetic complications of implants placed through sinus floor elevation and tilted implants engaged in basal bone to bypass the maxillary sinus. Sixty patients were enrolled for this study. According to the residual bone height of the posterior maxilla, the sample was divided into three groups of 20 patients: Group A (lateral sinus floor elevation), Group B (transcrestal sinus floor elevation), and Group C (tilted implants employed to bypass the sinus floor). Follow-up visits were performed one week after surgery, at three and six months, and then once a year for the next 4 years. The outcomes were the implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, and surgical and prosthetic complications. Although Groups A, B, and C demonstrated implant survival rates of 83.3%, 86.7%, and 98.3%, respectively, the statistical analysis showed no statistically significant difference between groups. Statistically significant differences between groups were also not found concerning marginal bone loss, as recorded by intra-oral X-ray measurements during follow-up examinations. Regarding complications, it was not possible to perform a statistical analysis. To reduce possible surgical risks, implant placement in basal bone could be preferred.

Simultaneous Implant Placement and Sinus Lift Using Leukocyte-Platelet Rich Fibrin: A Retrospective 40-Month Study

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to report the 40-month clinical radiographical outcomes of maxillary sinus floor augmentation using leukocyte-platelet rich fibrin (L-PRF) as a single graft in combination with immediately placed implants. Twenty partially edentulous individuals with missing teeth in the region associated to maxillary sinus were included in this retrospective study. A lateral sinus floor elevation was performed considering a complete wear of the bone wall of the maxillary sinus and immediately placing the implant and filled the maxillary sinus with L-PRF clots as a single graft. After 5 months, all the implants received single screwed implant-supported prostheses. Subsequent evaluation was every 4 months assessing the success rate and biological complications. Two maxillary sinus membrane were perforated and covered with L-PRF clots. The mean bone height gain was 62.6%, observing a 100% of success and that in all the cases achieved at least the implant height. In conclusion, the use of platelet-rich fibrin clot as a single graft biomaterial during the maxillary sinus lift procedure combined with immediate implant placement may be a reliable clinical alternative, even to repair the sinus membrane.

Implant survival after graftless sinus floor augmentation in highly atrophic maxillae: a randomized controlled trial in a split mouth study

PURPOSE

The success rate of dental implants after graftless sinus augmentation versus conventional sinus augmentation surgery in atrophic maxillae in edentulous patients was investigated.

METHODS

This randomized study was performed in ten edentulous patients with marked maxillary atrophy. On the graftless side, the sinus membrane was lifted by a resorbable membrane. The control side was augmented with a mixture of autografts and xenografts. Implant placement followed 6 months postoperatively. Outcomes were implant survival, success of prosthetic rehabilitation and stability of vertical bone gain.

RESULTS

Ten patients were included. Postoperative radiology showed sufficient bone gain on both maxillary sides. Follow-up varied from 57 to 88 months. The conventional side showed significant (p = 0.041) more bone gain than the experimental side (respectively, 9.69 mm and 6.20 mm). A total of 59 implants were placed: 30 after conventional, 29 after graftless augmentation. One implant was lost on the conventional side and four on the experimental side. The implant survival was significantly higher on the conventional side (96.7% vs. 86.2%, p < 0.001, RR = 4.14). Prosthetic restoration was functionally successful in all cases.

CONCLUSION

Bone gain and implant survival were significantly lower in the non-grafted side versus the grafted side. Prosthetic rehabilitation was possible in all ten patients. The non-grafted technique may have some potential for clinical use, although it showed poorer results. Trial registration The Netherlands Trialregister. NTR NL3541 (NTR3696). Registered 20 January 2013, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/3541 .