Browse > Article

Predictability of simultaneous implant placement with sinus floor elevation in the severely atrophic posterior maxillae ; Comparison of lateral and trans-crestal approaches  

Kim, Yeong-Wook (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, LivingWell Dental Hospital)
Keum, Yoon-Seon (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, LivingWell Dental Hospital)
Son, Hyo-Jeong (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, LivingWell Dental Hospital)
Lee, Jang-Yeol (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, LivingWell Dental Hospital)
Kim, Hyoun-Chull (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, LivingWell Dental Hospital)
Lee, Sang-Chull (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, LivingWell Dental Hospital)
Publication Information
The Journal of the Korean dental association / v.48, no.3, 2010 , pp. 205-217 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose The aim of this study is to evaluate the survival rates and analyze the stability of lateral approach and trans-crestal approach for maxillary sinus floor elevation of simultaneous implant placement. Materials and method 407 patients who have been treated in LivingWell dental hospital between 2003 to 2009 were selected. Lateral window technique, osteotome technique and sinus drill technique were used for sinus floor elevation procedure. A total of 714 implants-MP-1 HA coated implant(Tapered Screw $Vent^{TM}$, $Spline^{TM}$, Zimmer, USA), FBR surfaced implant(Pitt-$Easy^{TM}$, Oraltronics, Germany)-were placed in grafted maxillary sinus simultaneously. The autogenous bone or a combination with the allograft or alloplast was grafted into sinus. Sinus floor elevation was combined with vertical/horizontal onlay bone grafts to reconstruct the defect of alveolar ridge. Results The average preoperative height of the maxillary alveolar bone was 5.78mm(range: 0.4mm~12.5mm). 14 implants failed during the healing period(lateral approach: 4, trans-crestal approach: 10) and 3 implant failed after prosthetic loading(lateral approach: 2, trans-crestal approach: 1). The cumulative survival rate of implants after 6 years was 97.6%. Trans-crestal approach(97.4%) and lateral approach(97.9%) had similar survival rates. Conclusion The results indicate that the trans-crestal approach and lateral approach for maxillary sinus elevation is a acceptable method at atrophic maxillary posterior area.
Keywords
lateral approach; maxillary sinus floor elevation; simultaneous implant placement; trans-crestal approach;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 loannidou E, Dean JW. Osteotome sinus floor elevation and simultaneous. non-submerged implant pacement : case report and literature review. J Periodontol. Oct, 2000:71(10) :1613-9   DOI   ScienceOn
2 BJarni E et al. Maxilary sinus floor elevation using the (transalveolar) osteotome technique with or without grafting material. Part I- Implant survival and petients' perception. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 2009;20:667-676.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Engelke, W.G. et al. Alveolar reconstruction with splitting osteotomy and microfixation of implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1937;12:310-318
4 Taffler M, Osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation: a dinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004: 19;266-73.
5 Winter AA, PoIlack AS, Odrich RB. Placement of impants in the severely atrorilic posterior maxilla using localized management of the sinus floor: a preliminary study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002 Sep-Oct:17(5):687-95.
6 Rosen PS et al. The bone-added osteotome sinus fioor elevation technique: multicenter retrospective report of consecutively treated patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1999:14:853-8
7 I. Woo, MS, DDS, B. T. Le, DDS. MD. Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation: Review of Anatomy and Two Techniques. Implant Dent, 2004:13:28-32   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Wallace. S.S. & Forum S.J.Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systematic review 2003;8:328-343
9 Milan Jurisic et al. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation: comparing osteotome with lateral window immediate and delayed implant placements. An interim report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radid Endod. 2008;106:820- 827   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Giovanni B. Bruschi et al. Localized Management of Sinus Floor With Simultaneous Implant Placement: A Clinical Report Int J Oral Maxillofac Impants 1998;13:219-226
11 Summers RB. Sinus floor elevation with osteotomes. J Esthet Dent, 1998 :10: 164-171   DOI
12 Kent IN. Block MS: Simultaneous maxillary sinus floor bone grafting and placement of hydroxyapatite-coated implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989:47:238-242.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Summers RB. A new concept in maxillary impant surgery: the osteotome technique. Compend Cantin Educ Dent, 1994;15:152-162
14 Jensen OT. Treatment plannng for sinus grafts. In: Jensen OT,editor. The sinus bone graft. Carol Stream (IL): Quintessence. 1999:49-68
15 Zitzmann NU, Scharer P. Sinus elevation procedures In the resorbed posterior maxilla: Comparison of the crestal and lateral approaches. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 1998:85:8-17   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Tatum OH. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstruction. Dent Clin North Am, 1986;30:207-229
17 Marcel G. Le Gall DDS. Localized sinus elevation and osteocompression with single-stage tapered dental impants:Technical note, Int J Oral Maxillofac Impants, 2004:19:431-437
18 Di Girdamo M et al. Paroxysmal positional vertigo as a complication of osteotome sinus floor elevation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. Aug, 2005: 262(8) :631-3.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Akira Kitamura, DDS, PhD. Drill device for sinus lift. Implant Dent 2005:14:340-343   DOI
20 Fugazzotto PA. Success and failure rates of implants in type IV bone. J Periodontd 1993: 64: 1085-1087   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Jaffi n RA, Berman CL: The excessive loss of Branemark fixtures in type IV bone: A five year analysis. J Periodontol, 1991 :62:2-4   DOI
22 Horowitz RA. The use of osteotomes for sinus augmentation at time of implant placement. Cornpendum. 1997: 18 :441
23 Ho-Yeol Jang et al. Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation and Simultaneous Implant Placement: A retrospective study of 614 dental implants 대한치과이식학회지 ,2009:28(1) :29-40
24 Johns RB et al. A multicenter study of overdentures supported by Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impants, 1992;7:513-522
25 Albrektsson T et al. For long term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impants, 1986: 1:11-25
26 Ho-Yed Jang et al. The Choice of Graft Material In Relation to the Width of the Maxilary Sinus in the Internal Sinus Floor Augmentation. Unpuolished, accepted on 24th, Sep, 2009 by Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants
27 Engquist B et al. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of osseous integrated implants supporting overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impants, 1988: 3:129-134
28 Hahn J. Clinical uses of osteotomes. J Oral Implantol. 1999:25:23-29.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Kornarnyckyj OG, London RM. Osteotome singlestage dental impant placement with and without sinus elevation: A dinical report. Int J Orell Maxillofac Implants, 1998:13:799
30 Emmerich D. Att W, Stappert C. Sinus floor elevation using osteotomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J.Periodontol Aug. 2005;76(8) :1237-51   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Baumann A. Ewers R. Minimally invasive sinus lift. Limits and possiblities in the atrophic maxilla Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 1939 ;3(SuppI.)1 : S70-S73.
32 Sunitha V. Raja. MDS MPH. Mangement of the Posterior Maxilla With Sinus Lift: Review of Techniques. J Oral Maxllofac Surg. 2009:67 :1730- 1734   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Giovanni B. Bruschi et al. Localized Management of Sinus Floor With Simultaneous Implant Placement: A Clinical Report Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1938;13:219-226