Sinus floor elevation and simultaneous implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: a systematic review of clinical data

Comparison of sinusitis rate after sinus lift procedure and zygomatic implant surgery: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the reported sinusitis occurrence after the sinus lift procedure and zygomatic implant placement.

METHODS

This meta-analysis has been registered at PROSPERO. Studies were searched on six databases. Two authors screened titles and abstracts and fully analyzed the studies against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The RoB 2.0 and the ROBINS-I tools were used to assess the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. The random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis. The prevalence of sinusitis was calculated based on the total of patients. Subgroup analysis was performed by sinus lift or zygomatic implant surgery technique.

RESULTS

The search identified 2419 references. After applying the inclusion criteria, 18 sinus lift and 9 zygomatic implant placement studies were considered eligible. The pooled prevalence of sinusitis after sinus lift procedure was 1.11% (95% CI 0.30-2.28). The prevalence after zygomatic implant placement was 3.76% (95% CI 0.12-10.29). In the subgroup analysis, the lateral window approach showed a prevalence of sinusitis of 1.35% (95% CI 0.34-2.8), the transcrestal technique of 0.00% (95% CI 0.00-3.18), and the SALSA technique of 1.20% (95% CI 0.00-5.10). Regarding the techniques for zygomatic implant placement, the sinus slot technique showed a prevalence of 21.62% (95% CI 9.62-36.52) and the intrasinus technique of 4.36% (95% CI 0.33-11.08), and the prevalence after the extrasinus technique was 0.00% (95% CI 0.00-1.22).

CONCLUSION

The sinusitis occurrence rate was higher after zygomatic implant placement than after sinus lift procedure and this occurrence was different depending on the used technique.

Effect of the implant apical exposure and coverage < or ≥ 2 mm bone graft on transcrestal sinus floor elevation: a 1- to 7-year retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyze the effect of the apex coverage by the bone graft, including exposure and coverage less than or greater than 2 mm on implant survival rate and peri-implant bone and soft tissue remodeling.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 264 implants in 180 patients who had undergone transcrestal sinus floor elevation (TSFE) with simultaneous implant placement were included in this retrospective cohort study. Radiographic assessment was used to categorize the implants into three groups based on apical implant bone height (ABH): ≤ 0 mm, < 2 mm, or ≥ 2 mm. The implant survival rate, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL) during short-term (1-3 years) and mid- to long-term (4-7 years) follow-up, and clinical parameters were used to evaluate the effect of implant apex coverage after TSFE.

RESULTS

Group 1 had 56 implants (ABH ≤ 0 mm), group 2 had 123 implants (ABH > 0 mm, but < 2 mm), and group 3 had 85 implants (ABH ≥ 2 mm). There was no significant difference in the implant survival rate between groups 2 and 3 compared to group 1 (p = 0.646, p = 0.824, respectively). The MBL during short-term and mid- to long-term follow-up indicated that apex coverage could not be considered a risk factor. Furthermore, apex coverage did not have a significant effect on other clinical parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite limitations, our study found that implant apex coverage by the bone graft, including exposure and coverage levels less than or greater than 2 mm, did not significantly affect implant survival, short-term or mid- to long-term MBL, or peri-implant soft tissue outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Based on 1- to 7-year data, the study suggests that implant apical exposure and coverage levels of less than or greater than 2 mm bone graft are both valid options for TSFE cases.

Guidance and rationale for the immediate implant placement in the maxillary molar

Objectives

While the reliability of immediate implant placement in the maxillary molar has been discussed, its significance is questionable. There have been no guidelines for case selection and surgical technique for successful treatment outcomes of immediate maxillary molar implants. Therefore, in this study, we classified alveolar bone height and socket morphology of the maxillary molar to establish guidelines for immediate implant placement.

Materials and Methods

From 2011 to 2019, we retrospectively analyzed 106 patients with 148 immediate implants at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Dental Hospital. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, and patient characteristics and treatment results were evaluated clinically and radiologically.

Results

A total of 29 tapered, sand-blasted, large-grit, and acid-etched (SLA) surfaces of implants were placed in 26 patients. The mean patient age was 64.88 years. Two implants failed and were reinstalled, resulting in a 93.10% survival rate. Fluctuating marginal bone level changes indicating bone regeneration and bone loss were observed in the first year following installation and remained stable after one year of prosthesis loading, with an average bone loss of 0.01±0.01 mm on the distal side and 0.03±0.03 mm on the mesial side.

Conclusion

This clinical study demonstrated the significance of immediate implant placement in maxillary molars as a reliable treatment with a high survival rate using tapered SLA implants. With an accurate approach to immediate implantation, surgical intervention and treatment time can be reduced, resulting in patient satisfaction and comfort.

Osseointegration at Implants Installed in Composite Bone: A Randomized Clinical Trial on Sinus Floor Elevation

Osseointegration of implants installed in conjunction with sinus floor elevation might be affected by the presence of residual graft. The implant surface characteristics and the protection of the access window using a collagen membrane might influence the osseointegration. To evaluate these factors, sinus floor elevation was performed in patients using a natural bovine bone grafting material. The access windows were either covered with a collagen membrane made of porcine corium (Mb group) or left uncovered (No-Mb group) and, after six months, two mini-implants with either a moderate rough or turned surfaces were installed. After 3 months, biopsies containing the mini-implants were retrieved, processed histologically, and analyzed. Twenty patients, ten in each group, were included in the study. The two mini-implants were retrieved from fourteen patients, six belonging to the Mb group, and eight to the No-Mb group. No statistically significant differences were found in osseointegration between groups. However, statistically significant differences were found between the two surfaces. It was concluded that implants with a moderately rough surface installed in a composite bone presented much higher osseointegration compared to those with a turned surface. The present study failed to show an effect of the use of a collagen membrane on the access window.