Long‐term outcomes of osteotome sinus floor elevation without grafting in severely atrophic maxilla: A 10‐year prospective study

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the present study was to report 10-year results of osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) without grafting severely atrophic maxilla (residual bone height ≤4 mm). Materials and Methods: Patients undergoing OSFE without grafting and implant placement were included for 10-year examinations. Implant survival, complicationfree survival, modified bleeding index (mBI), modified plaque index (mPI), pocket probing depth (PPD), peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG) and mean cost of recurrence were evaluated. Results: Overall, 23 patients with 35 implants attended 10-year examination. Cemented implant crowns or implant-supported fixed dental prostheses were delivered to the patients. Kaplan-Meier implant survival was 89.2% at implant level and 84.1% at patient level. Complication-free survival was 26.0% at patient level and 37.0% at implant level. The average complication-free survival time was 74.6 months (95% CI: 63.2-86.0 months) at implant level and 69.1 months (95% CI: 54.8-83.4 months) at patient level. The mBI, mPI, PPD, MBL and ESBG at 10-year follow-up were 0.91 ± 0.58, 0.48 ± 0.51, 2.94 ± 0.79 mm, 1.63 ± 0.83 mm and 2.72 ± 0.51 mm, respectively. The cost of managing recurrence was 43.6% of the initial cost of treatment. Conclusion: The results of the present study indicate that OSFE without grafting is a reliable treatment option in severely atrophic maxilla. Acceptable survival rate, stable MBL and ESBG could be achieved within 10 years. Low complication-free survival and high costs of recurrence management need to be considered.

Implant failure and associated risk factors of transcrestal sinus floor elevation: A retrospective study

“…Low RBH was detected to significantly increase late implant loss at TSFE sites. With the development of dental devices and clinical skills, the indications of TSFE have gradually expanded (Al‐Dajani, 2016; Gonzalez et al, 2014; Shi et al, 2020). For example, an RCT demonstrated that implant placed simultaneously with TSFE had a comparable survival rate to those placed after LSFE for sites of RBH <6 mm (Zhou et al, 2021).…”

Bone preservation or augmentation simultaneous with or prior to dental implant placement: A systematic review of outcomes and outcome measures used in clinical trials in the last 10 years

“…When it came to SFA, the most concerned outcomes were implant survival, complications, 2D radiographic bone gain/changes, 3D radiographic bone gain/changes, and MBLs, while PROMs and peri‐implant clinical parameters were seldom reported. SFA has been reported as a predictable technique in the posterior maxilla with limited bone height (Raghoebar et al, 2019; Shi et al, 2020). Thus, studies on SFA nowadays focus more on detecting potential risks and avoiding complications.…”

Clinical evaluation of narrow‐diameter implants versus standard‐diameter implants with lateral bone augmentation in posterior jaws: Three‐year results of a randomized controlled trial

“…The total cumulative treatment cost included the cost relate to initial treatment and additional expenses for management of technical and biological complications experienced during the 3‐year follow‐up. Cost was determined by the actual fee of the necessary procedures derived from guided price by local government in Shanghai (Shi et al, 2020).…”