Impact of maxillary sinus augmentation on oral health-related quality of life

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to measure the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) after maxillary sinus augmentation to determine the physical and psychological impact of this procedure for the patient.MethodsThree hundred sixteen patients treated with an external or internal maxillary sinus augmentation and a total of 863 implants in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany, between July 2002 and December 2007 were included in this retrospective study. Total implant survival was assessed. Completion of a modified 26-item version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-G) for assessing the oral health-related quality of life before and after the treatment was asked for. Subcategories were (1) functional limitations, (2) physical and psychological disabilities, and (3) complaints due to the surgical procedure. In 53 patients available for clinical follow-up examination, assessment of soft tissue parameters was performed.ResultsAfter an average time in situ of 41.2 ± 27 months (3.4 years), the in situ rate was 95.4%. One-year survival rate and five-year survival rate according to Kaplan Meier were 95.4 and 94.4%. Concerning functional limitations, significant better values for OHRQoL after sinus augmentation procedure than before the treatment (p < 0.001) were seen. In the subcategory physical and psychological disabilities, all questions had significant better values after the sinus lift (p < 0.001). Concerning complaints due to the surgical procedure, mean total scores were 5.1 ± 5.4 pre-operative, 6.9 ± 6.1 (0–31) post-operative, and 2.4 ± 3.7 recently. This meant a significant difference between “pre-operative” vs. “post-operative” (p = 0.003), “pre-operative” vs. “recently” (p < 0.001), and “post-operative” vs. “recently” (p < 0.001). Concerning the influence of implant indication, edentulous patients showed the most distinct improvement after the procedure. Clinical assessment showed stable soft tissue parameters.ConclusionsEvaluation of OHRQoL after sinus augmentation showed a significant improvement indicating a remarkable benefit for the patients through this procedure.

Randomized controlled multicentre study comparing short dental implants (6 mm) versus longer dental implants (11–15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures: 5‐Year data

“…The outcomes support the observed clinical findings (healthy peri‐implant tissues) and the relatively low number of technical complications. Longer‐term studies on dental implant therapy with or without sinus grafting applying OHIP questionnaires revealed similar decreasing OHIP values during the follow‐up after successful therapy (AlZarea, ; Petricevic, Celebic, & Rener‐Sitar, ; Schiegnitz et al., ). The observed OHIP values then tend to reach values similar to the ones of healthy subjects without any need for treatment (John, Micheelis, & Biffar, ), thereby revealing an increased patient satisfaction.…”

Narrow‐diameter implants: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…High success rates and excellent predictability of dental implant treatment have been demonstrated in countless clinical studies and a multiplicity of indications (Al‐Nawas et al., ; Moraschini, Poubel, Ferreira & Barboza Edos, ; Schiegnitz et al., ). In addition, oral rehabilitation with dental implants may provide an increase in oral health‐related quality of life (Heydecke, Locker, Awad, Lund & Feine, ; Schiegnitz et al., ). However, atrophy of the alveolar crest with reduced bone width and height due to trauma, malformation, neoplasia, denture wearing and marginal periodontitis is a challenging limitation for dental implant placement.…”

Effects of Strontium Ranelate on Alveolar Ridge Morphology Augmentation

“…Keeping healing time in mind, placing an implant in a freshly extracted socket has gained popularity, with literature presenting clear guidelines for patient selection and methods of good outcomes (Zarandi & Novin, 2017;Schiegnitz et al, 2017;Chuka et al, 2017). Stability plays an important role in Osseointegration and primary stability directly influences the osseointegration of implants (Chen et al, 2017;Kim et al, 2017;Dhaliwal et al, 2017).…”