Clinical and radiographic evaluation of osseodensification versus osteotome for sinus floor elevation in partially atrophic maxilla: A prospective long term study

Arafat, Shereen Wagdy; Elbaz, Mohamed

doi:10.21608/edj.2015.71261

Cited by 15 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(Huwais & Meyer, 2017). These results were in accordance with the study performed by (Arafat & A Elbaz, 2019) where the authors used the Densah burs for ossedensification during sinus floor elevation in atrophic maxilla.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Authors in this study preferred to use the delayed loading protocol as the rates of implant loss following immediate loading in overdentures is higher in comparison to delayed loading. (Arafat & A Elbaz, 2019) (Liu et al, 2021) Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) offers a noninvasive clinical measurement of stability and osseointegration of implants; it is considered a useful tool to establish the implant loading time. The RFA values are represented by a quantitative unit called the Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) on a scale from 1 to 100.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of primary stability and bone density of maxillary implant overdenture following Osseo densification concept.

Abdelwahab

Nawwar

Khourazaty

2022

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of primary stability and bone density of maxillary implant overdenture following Osseo densification concept.

Abdelwahab

Nawwar

Khourazaty

2022

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The study was performed in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University. The criteria of patient selection included (14,15): Patients with missing maxillary premolars and molars, vertical bone height of 5-8 mm, nonsmokers and good oral hygiene. The criteria excluded patients with bad oral hygiene, maxillary sinusitis, presence of infection or periapical lesions in adjacent teeth, bruxism or clenching, alcoholism, multiple sinus septa and patients taking medications or patients with medically compromised conditions that affect the procedure (14,15).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Osseodensification by Densah Burs Versus Osteotome for Transcrestal Maxillary Sinus Lifting With Simultaneous Implant Placement

Elghobashy

Shaaban

Melek

2022

Alexandria Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION:Implant placement in the posterior maxilla is problematic, not only due to inferior properties of bone but also due to loss of vertical bone height which happens after extraction of posterior teeth. When the required additional height is few millimeters, indirect transcrestal sinus lifting procedures is recommended. This study was carried out to compare clinically transcrestal sinus lifting with Densah burs versus osteotome with simultaneous implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS:This study was designed to be randomized clinical trial, a total of 11 patients with missing maxillary premolars or molars and with limited vertical bone height below the maxillary sinus floor (5 to 8 mm) received 12 implants either with osteotome or with osseodensification transcrestal sinus lifting. The 11 patients were divided into 2 groups, group A received osseodensification sinus lifting, group B received osteotome sinus lifting. Clinical follow up was done over 6 months. Results: No significant difference was detected regarding postoperative pain and edema. The P value (0.002*) showed a statistically significant difference in the operation time between the 2 groups. The mean of primary stability in densah bur group was 66.17 ±9.57, while the mean in the osteotome group was 54.83 ±7.19. The P value was (0.043*) showed a significant difference in primary stability between both groups. Also there was a significant difference in secondary stability between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Both osseodensification and osteotome technique showed a good clinical outcome in 6 months follow up, with better implant stability in the osseodensification cases.

show abstract

“…In 2019, a study carried by Arafat & Elbaz 12 to evaluate the differences between osteotome versus osseodensification. They stated that both groups showed statistically significant increase in bone height, which coincided with our work findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was suggested that this may be due to that osseodensification induces compactness of bone chips on the osteotomy site walls and therefore, faster secondary stability achievement. 12 Likewise, a recent systematic review highlighted the efficiency of densah burs in such field and osseodensification showed higher percentage of bone volume, increased bone to implant contact, as well as improved bone density 13 There is a conflict in literature that newly formed bone depends on the residual bone height, where it was claimed by Nedir et al in 2016 10 that higher ESBG is usually associated with lower residual bone ridge. Nonetheless, Yang, et al 2019 7 suggested that no correlation could be extrapolated from both factors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Perception and Radiographic Assessment of Sinus Lifting Procedure using Densah Bur versus Osteotome-mediated sinus lifting: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Rostom

Eiid

2021

Advanced Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the patient perception towards osteotome and densah burs in sinus lifting procedures and to assess the new bone generated using CBCT at 6 months post-operatively. The study hypothesis was that densah bur would show comparable results to osteotome-mediated sinus lifting. Subjects and methods: Ten patients were enrolled in the study with atrophied maxillary posterior edentulous area that required rehabilitation with implants and sinus membrane elevation. Sinus membrane was elevated with two techniques, Osteotome and Densah bur sinus lifting procedures. Clinical (sinus perforation, post-operative swelling, and headache/vertigo) and radiographic parameters (residual bone height (RBH) and endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG)) were assessed. Result: In both groups, new bone levels were higher in comparison to initial levels with statistical significant difference. Densah bur showed higher mean ESBG than osteotome group with values 1.8 ± 0.4 and 1.4 ± 0.5 respectively (p = 0.21). Post-operative complications comparison showed non-significant differences between both groups except for headache and vertigo. Conclusion:The protruded implants can act as tents and allow formation of blood clot with concomitant bone regeneration. Although the two techniques applied for drilling showed comparable radiographic results, however, they displayed differences in patient perception. According to this study, it can be concluded that osseodensification may surpass osteotome-lifting procedure when it comes to patient comfort and satisfaction.

show abstract

Clinical and radiographic evaluation of osseodensification versus osteotome for sinus floor elevation in partially atrophic maxilla: A prospective long term study

Cited by 15 publications

References 9 publications

Assessment of primary stability and bone density of maxillary implant overdenture following Osseo densification concept.

Assessment of primary stability and bone density of maxillary implant overdenture following Osseo densification concept.

Osseodensification by Densah Burs Versus Osteotome for Transcrestal Maxillary Sinus Lifting With Simultaneous Implant Placement

Patient Perception and Radiographic Assessment of Sinus Lifting Procedure using Densah Bur versus Osteotome-mediated sinus lifting: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About