Premium
Transcrestal sinus floor augmentation with immediate implant placement applied in three types of fresh extraction sockets: A clinical prospective study with 1‐year follow‐up
Author(s) -
Chen Yaqian,
Yuan Shanshan,
Zhou Nan,
Man Yi
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/cid.12529
Subject(s) - medicine , sinus (botany) , maxillary sinus , dentistry , molar , implant , dental implant , nasal cavity , prospective cohort study , surgery , botany , biology , genus
Background Immediate implant insertion and transcrestal sinus augmentation both can provide a lot of advantages for patients and clinicians. Objective This prospective study aims to verify the use of a modified technique for immediate implant insertion simultaneously with sinus augmentation in different types of sockets. Materials and methods Thirty‐seven patients were recruited for the clinical study and were divided into 3 groups according to the relationship of their maxillary molar roots and sinus floor: group 1 with none of the teeth roots contacts sinus floor; group 2 as at least 1 teeth root contacting sinus floor, but no root is observed penetrating into sinus cavity; group 3 with at least 1 teeth root penetrating into sinus cavity. Implants were inserted after transcrestal sinus floor augmentation and immediately after tooth extraction. The change of mucosa thickness, diagnosis of rhinosinusitis, marginal bone loss (MBL), pocket depth (PD), and sulcus bleeding index were examined through radiographic measurement or clinical monitoring. Result During the study period, no implants failed. The relationship of the root of maxillary molars and sinus floor may have an effect on the bone height of the interradicular crest. Sinus mucosa was observed thicker after surgery. After healing period, sinus mucosa returned as thin as presurgery. At the time of 1‐year follow‐up, MBL was measured on X‐ray (group 1: mesial: 0.63 ± 0.20 mm, distal: 0.70 ± 0.14 mm; group 2: mesial: 0.67 ± 0.21, distal: 0.65 ± 0.22 mm; group 3: mesial: 0.70 ± 0.15 mm, distal: 0.73 ± 0.19 mm). No statistical difference was found in MBL and PD as well as bleeding index among 3 groups. Conclusion In consideration of the advantages of sinus floor augmentation and immediate implant placement, our clinical result confirms that it is promising to combine the 2 techniques for replacing maxillary molars especially when using residual roots as implant orientation and taking full advantage of the interradicular crest bone.