LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 34 , Issue 4
July/August 2019

Pages e65–e76


Implants in the Posterior Maxilla: Open Sinus Lift Versus Conventional Implant Placement. A Systematic Review


Javier Romero-Millán, DDS, MSc, PhD/Javier Aizcorbe-Vicente, DDS/Maria Peñarrocha-Diago, MD, DDS, PhD/Pablo Galindo-Moreno, DDS, PhD/Luigi Canullo, DDS, PhD/David Peñarrocha-Oltra, DDS, MSc, PhD


PMID: 30807622
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.7274

Purpose: To compare implant survival, marginal bone loss, peri-implant clinical parameters, and complications in dental implants placed in the posterior maxilla in native bone or after grafting using the open sinus lift technique. Materials and Methods: A search was made of two electronic databases (MEDLINE via PubMed and the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register [CENTRAL]), complemented by a manual search. The study included randomized clinical trials, non-randomized clinical trials, and observational studies such as cohort studies and case-control studies conducted on a prospective or retrospective basis and comparing the placement of standard-length implants (≥ 10 mm) in native bone or after grafting using the sinus lift procedure. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool and the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Results: The search yielded 51 studies, of which 23 were included. Two studies were evaluated with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool, with neither being identified as presenting a low risk of bias. Twenty-one studies were evaluated by the MINORS, yielding a mean score of 15.76 points out of 24. The implant survival rate in the control group was 90% to 100% versus 75.3% to 100% in the test group over a follow-up period of 6 to 120 months. Most studies revealed no statistically significant differences. In most of the publications, marginal bone loss was greater in the test group than in the control group, though without reaching statistical significance. Similar results were obtained in both groups with regard to the peri-implant clinical parameters. There were more surgical complications in the test group than in the control group—such complications being inherent to the sinus lift procedure. Conclusion: Implant placement after sinus lift affords results in terms of implant survival, marginal bone loss, and peri-implant clinical parameters similar to those obtained with conventional implant placement in native bone. However, there is a greater incidence of surgical complications associated with the sinus lift procedure.


Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

 

© 2020 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help