-
Ear, Nose, & Throat Journal Dec 2022Implant dentistry has become a popularized means of replacing damaged or missing teeth. Although it has become common practice, there are accounts of implants displacing...
Implant dentistry has become a popularized means of replacing damaged or missing teeth. Although it has become common practice, there are accounts of implants displacing into surrounding structures, commonly the maxillary sinus. We present the case of a 54-year-old man who presented with chronic left sided pain and pressure found to be secondary to a displaced implant obstructing the left maxillary outflow sinus tract. A systematic review was conducted to assess the current management and treatment options for dental implants displaced into the maxillary sinus. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and the lateral window approach were both found to be safe techniques with minimal postoperative complications.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Maxillary Sinus; Dental Implants; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 35968734
DOI: 10.1177/01455613221121043 -
International Journal of Implant... Feb 2019After tooth loss, the posterior maxilla is usually characterized by limited bone height secondary to pneumatization of the maxillary sinus and/or collapse of the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
After tooth loss, the posterior maxilla is usually characterized by limited bone height secondary to pneumatization of the maxillary sinus and/or collapse of the alveolar ridge that preclude in many instances the installation of dental implants. In order to compensate for the lack of bone height, several treatment options have been proposed. These treatment alternatives aimed at the installation of dental implants with or without the utilization of bone grafting materials avoiding the perforation of the Schneiderian membrane. Nevertheless, membrane perforations represent the most common complication among these procedures. Consequently, the present review aimed at the elucidation of the relevance of this phenomenon on implant survival and complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Electronic and manual literature searches were performed by two independent reviewers in several databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, for articles up to January 2018 reporting outcome of implant placement perforating the sinus floor without regenerative procedure (lateral sinus lift or transalveolar technique) and graft material. The intrusion of the implants can occur during drilling or implant placement, with and without punch out Schneiderian. Only studies with at least 6 months of follow-up were included in the qualitative assessment.
RESULTS
Eight studies provided information on the survival rate, with a global sample of 493 implants, being the weighted mean survival rate 95.6% (IC 95%), after 52.7 months of follow-up. The level of implant penetration (≤ 4 mm or > 4 mm) did not report statistically significant differences in survival rate (p = 0.403). Seven studies provided information on the rate of clinical complications, being the mean complication rate 3.4% (IC 95%). The most frequent clinical complication was epistaxis, without finding significant differences according to the level of penetration. Five studies provide information on the radiographic complication; the most common complication was thickening of the Schneiderian membrane. The weighted complication rate was 14.8% (IC 95%), and penetration level affects the rate of radiological complications, being these of 5.29% in implant penetrating ≤4 mm and 29.3% in implant penetrating > 4 mm, without reaching statistical significant difference (p = 0.301).
CONCLUSION
The overall survival rate of the implants into the sinus cavity was 95.6%, without statistical differences according to the level of penetration. The clinical and radiological complications were 3.4% and 14.8% respectively. The most frequent clinical complication was the epistaxis, and the radiological complication was thickening of the Schneiderian membrane, without reaching statistical significant difference according to the level of implant penetration inside the sinus.
PubMed: 30719578
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-019-0157-7 -
BMC Oral Health May 2018To investigate the feasibility, safety and stability of current interventions for moving teeth through the maxillary sinus (MTTMS) by performing a systematic review of...
BACKGROUND
To investigate the feasibility, safety and stability of current interventions for moving teeth through the maxillary sinus (MTTMS) by performing a systematic review of the literature.
METHODS
The electronic databases PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI and SIGLE were searched without a language restriction. The primary outcomes were parameters related to orthodontic treatment, including orthodontic protocols, magnitude of forces, type of tooth movement, duration and rate of tooth movement, and remolding of alveolar bone and the maxillary sinus floor. The secondary outcomes were safety and stability, including root resorption, perforation of the sinus floor, loss of pulp vitality and periodontal health and relapse.
RESULTS
Nine case reports with 25 teeth were included and systematically analyzed. Fifty to two hundred g of force was applied to move teeth through the maxillary sinus. Bodily movement was accomplished, but initial tipping was observed in 7 cases. The rate was 0.6-0.7 mm/month for molar intrusion and 0.16-1.17 and 0.05-0.16 mm/month for mesial-distal movement of premolars and molars, respectively. Bone formation and remolding of the sinus floor occurred in 7 cases. Root resorption within 6 to 30 months was observed in 3 cases, while no cases of perforation of the sinus floor, loss of pulp vitality, periodontal health impairment or relapse were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
At the present stage, no evidence-based protocol could be recommended to guide MTTMS. The empirical application of constant and light to moderate forces (by TAD, segment and multibrackets) to slowly move teeth through or into the maxillary sinus in adults appears to be practical and secure. Bodily movement was accomplished, but teeth appear to be easily tipped initially, potentially resulting in root resorption. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution as the currently available evidence is based on only a few case reports or case series and longitudinal or controlled studies are lacking in this area.
Topics: Alveolar Process; Humans; Maxillary Sinus; Osteogenesis; Root Resorption; Stress, Mechanical; Time Factors; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 29792184
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0551-1 -
International Journal of Implant... Oct 2023The main purpose of this study was to evaluate whether large granular bovine bone can be as effective as small granular bovine bone in maxillary sinus floor elevation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The main purpose of this study was to evaluate whether large granular bovine bone can be as effective as small granular bovine bone in maxillary sinus floor elevation.
METHODS
A comprehensive online search of eligible articles was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science, and a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed from establishment to February, 2023. The outcome indicators were the percentage of connective tissue, the percentage of newly formed bone and the percentage of residual xenograft respectively. The meta-analysis was conducted by using the Stata 15.1 (Stata Conpernarn, USA) and Review Manager software5.4.1.
RESULTS
After careful screening and review, a total of 4 studies were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. The data were extracted to compare the histological performance of bovine bones with different particle sizes after maxillary sinus elevation. No significant differences were found in the percentage of connective tissue, the percentage of newly formed bone, and the percentage of residual xenograft.
CONCLUSION
In this study, a systematically review of the previous literature showed that similar histological results were obtained for both large-particle bovine bone and small-particle bovine bone. Therefore, the large granular bovine bone and the small granular bovine bone were equally effective in maxillary sinus elevation. It is difficult to make conclusion from limited evidence from four studies. More clinical evidence was needed.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Cattle; Sinus Floor Augmentation; Bone Transplantation; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Particle Size; Bone Substitutes
PubMed: 37782429
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-023-00502-1 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Nov 2016To study the effect of the recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2) on sinus volumetric and histometric changes after sinus floor augmentation compared... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
To study the effect of the recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2) on sinus volumetric and histometric changes after sinus floor augmentation compared to a conventional approach of non-biologic bone grafting materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic search of 4 databases (January 1990-February 2015), including PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Central, and a hand search of peer-reviewed journals for relevant articles were performed. Human clinical trials with data on comparison of sinus volumetric and/or histometric outcomes with and without the use of rhBMP-2 in sinus grafting procedures, with ≥10 augmentation sites in each study group, and with a follow-up period of at least 6 months, were included. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to analyze weighted mean difference (WMD) and confidence interval (CI) for the recorded variables according to PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. The results of the meta-analyses showed that the WMD of vertical bone height gain was -0.14 mm (95% CI = -1.91 to 1.62 mm, P = 0.87), the WMD of bone density was -142.42 mg/cm (95% CI = -310.62-25.78 mg/cm , P = 0.10), the WMD of the percentage of vital bone was -4.59% (95% CI = -11.73-2.56%, P = 0.21), and the WMD of the percentage of residual bone grafting materials was -9.90% (95% CI = -26.38-6.58%, P = 0.21). The comparison of implant survival rate presented an overall risk ratio of 1.00 (95% CI = 0.94-1.07). The two approaches (conventional bone grafting compared to BMPs) demonstrated comparable effectiveness for both clinical and histomorphometric measures.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review revealed that the use of rhBMP-2 in maxillary sinus floor augmentation achieved similar clinical and histometric outcomes when compared to conventional sinus grafting procedures after a healing period of 6-9 months. However, previous studies showed the morbidity and other patient-reported outcomes were improved in rhBMP-2 approaches as compared to bone autograft procedures (both intraoral and extraoral bone harvesting because no donor site is required). Long-term studies are required to determine the cost-benefit of sinus floor augmentation procedures for patients requiring implant reconstruction.
Topics: Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2; Humans; Recombinant Proteins; Sinus Floor Augmentation; Transforming Growth Factor beta
PubMed: 26620161
DOI: 10.1111/clr.12737 -
World Journal of Stem Cells Jul 2015To investigate the effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA), with various scaffold materials.
AIM
To investigate the effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA), with various scaffold materials.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS were searched using keywords such as sinus graft, MSA, maxillary sinus lift, sinus floor elevation, MSC and cell-based, in different combinations. The searches included full text articles written in English, published over a 10-year period (2004-2014). Inclusion criteria were clinical/radiographic and histologic/ histomorphometric studies in humans and animals, on the use of MSCs in MSA. Meta-analysis was performed only for experimental studies (randomized controlled trials and controlled trials) involving MSA, with an outcome measurement of histologic evaluation with histomorphometric analysis reported. Mean and standard deviation values of newly formed bone from each study were used, and weighted mean values were assessed to account for the difference in the number of subjects among the different studies. To compare the results between the test and the control groups, the differences of regenerated bone in mean and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine studies (18 animal studies and 21 human studies) published over a 10-year period (between 2004 and 2014) were considered to be eligible for inclusion in the present literature review. These studies demonstrated considerable variation with respect to study type, study design, follow-up, and results. Meta-analysis was performed on 9 studies (7 animal studies and 2 human studies). The weighted mean difference estimate from a random-effect model was 9.5% (95%CI: 3.6%-15.4%), suggesting a positive effect of stem cells on bone regeneration. Heterogeneity was measured by the I (2) index. The formal test confirmed the presence of substantial heterogeneity (I (2) = 83%, P < 0.0001). In attempt to explain the substantial heterogeneity observed, we considered a meta-regression model with publication year, support type (animal vs humans) and follow-up length (8 or 12 wk) as covariates. After adding publication year, support type and follow-up length to the meta-regression model, heterogeneity was no longer significant (I (2) = 33%, P = 0.25).
CONCLUSION
Several studies have demonstrated the potential for cell-based approaches in MSA; further clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.
PubMed: 26240683
DOI: 10.4252/wjsc.v7.i6.976 -
Journal of Stomatology, Oral and... Jun 2021This review primarily evaluated the success, survival and failure rates of implants shorter than 10 mm restored with single-unit or splinted fixed dental prostheses in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This review primarily evaluated the success, survival and failure rates of implants shorter than 10 mm restored with single-unit or splinted fixed dental prostheses in maxillary sinus augmented sites.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Two reviewers independently performed the systematic search of electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL, up to September 2019 with no language restriction. A supplemental hand search consisted of screening 13 journals. The inclusion criteria were: primary studies reporting implant, prosthetic and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of extra-short and short implants placed in conjunction with sinus floor elevation in partially dentate patients, restored with single- and splinted-crowns for direct comparison, with a minimal 1-year follow-up. Weighted arithmetic mean (WAM) of the implant survival was performed according to the type of prosthesis. This was confirmed by using Review Manager software to perform meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Two observational studies reporting on 106 tapered, press-fit, sintered porous-surfaced implants with a length ranging from 5 mm to 9 mm were included in this systematic review. Of these, 20 and 86 implants were restored with single and splinted prostheses, respectively. The risk ratio (RR) was 1.16 (95% CI: .31-4.30, p = .58, I² = 0%) for individually restored implants failure when compared to splinted implants, indicating that short dental implants restored with single crowns could have a 16% higher possibility of failure if compared to implants with splinted crowns. The heterogeneity value was not statistically significative (p = .58). No statistical difference in the implant survival rate of the two types of analysed prostheses was observed after WAM (p= .923). The level of evidence for the included studies ranged from low (4) to fair (2B).
CONCLUSION
Similar clinical outcomes up to a 9-year follow-up were observed in single and splinted porous-surfaced implants shorter than 10 mm located in sites with sinus lift. However, the conclusion shall be interpreted with caution due to the level of evidence and limited number of included studies included in this systematic review.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans; Sinus Floor Augmentation
PubMed: 33002610
DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2020.08.013 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jan 2022The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to critically evaluate the currently existing clinical evidence on the efficacy of graftless maxillary sinus... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to critically evaluate the currently existing clinical evidence on the efficacy of graftless maxillary sinus membrane elevation for implantation in the atrophic posterior maxilla. A search protocol without limitations to November 2020 was followed by two independent researchers. Randomized controlled trials using the lateral window approach for graftless sinus membrane elevation were included. Uncontrolled, retrospective, non-comparative studies, case reports, and experimental studies in animals or cadavers were excluded. The search identified 2777 studies. Critical selection by two independent researchers then led to the inclusion of a total of nine studies. A risk of bias assessment was applied using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. A meta-analysis was conducted for seven studies. Results showed a high overall implant survival rate in both the graftless and bone-grafted sinus lift groups (97.92% and 98.73%, respectively). The graftless sinus lift group showed a significantly lower vertical bone height gain, with a mean difference of -1.73mm (P=0.01), and a significantly lower bone density, with a mean difference of -94.7 HU (P<0.001). The implant stability quotient values did not differ significantly between the test and control groups (P=0.07).
Topics: Animals; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Restoration Failure; Maxilla; Maxillary Sinus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Sinus Floor Augmentation
PubMed: 33849784
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2021.03.016 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Jul 2017When considering dental implant rehabilitation in atrophic posterior sectors, the maxillary sinuses must be evaluated in detail. Knowledge of the anatomical variations... (Review)
Review
What is the frequency of anatomical variations and pathological findings in maxillary sinuses among patients subjected to maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography? A systematic review.
BACKGROUND
When considering dental implant rehabilitation in atrophic posterior sectors, the maxillary sinuses must be evaluated in detail. Knowledge of the anatomical variations and of the potential lesions found in these structures conditions the outcome of sinus lift procedures and therefore of the dental implants. A systematic review is made to determine the frequency of anatomical variations and pathological findings in maxillary sinuses among patients subjected to cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A PubMed (MEDLINE) literature search was made of articles published up until 20 December 2015. The systematic review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). The quality of the studies included in the review was assessed using the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS).
RESULTS
The combinations of search terms resulted in a list of 3482 titles. Twenty-three studies finally met the inclusion criteria and were entered in the systematic review, comprising a total of 11,971 patients. The most common anatomical variations were pneumatization and sinus septa. The prevalence of maxillary sinus disease ranged from 7.5% to 66%. The most common pathological findings of the maxillary sinus were mucosal thickening, sinusitis and sinus opacification.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the main indication of CBCT of the maxillary sinus in dentistry is sinus floor elevation/treatment planning and evaluation prior to dental implant placement, this imaging modality is increasingly also used for endodontic and periodontal purposes. There is no consensus regarding the cutoff point beyond which mucosal thickening of the maxillary sinus should be regarded as pathological, and the definition of maxillary sinusitis moreover varies greatly in the scientific literature. In this regard, international consensus is required in relation to these concepts, with a clear distinction between healthy and diseased maxillary sinuses.
Topics: Anatomic Variation; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Humans; Maxillary Sinus; Paranasal Sinus Diseases
PubMed: 28578369
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.21456 -
Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2021Test the hypothesis of no difference in the volumetric stability of the grafting material following maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone graft... (Review)
Review
Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation with Autogenous Bone Graft Compared with a Composite Grafting Material or Bone Substitute Alone: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Assessing Volumetric Stability of the Grafting Material.
OBJECTIVES
Test the hypothesis of no difference in the volumetric stability of the grafting material following maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone graft compared with composite grafting material or bone substitute alone applying the lateral window technique.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane library and hand-search of relevant journals were conducted. Human studies published in English until the 9 of October 2020 were included. Outcome measures included three-dimensional volumetric changes of the grafting material and potential predictive parameters. Volumetric changes were evaluated by descriptive statistics and meta-analysis including 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS
Electronic search and hand-searching resulted in 102 entries. Four randomized controlled trials with unclear risk of bias fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The volumetric stability of the grafting material was significantly improved by mixing autogenous bone graft with a non-resorbable xenograft compared with autogenous bone graft. Meta-analyses assessing absolute and relative volumetric changes demonstrated no significant differences between autogenous bone graft compared with allogeneic bone graft, synthetic biomaterials combined with autogenous bone graft or used alone. Association between volumetric changes of the grafting material and potential predictive parameters were not assessed in the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Volumetric reduction of the augmented area seems inevitable following maxillary sinus floor augmentation regardless of the grafting material. The volumetric stability of autogenous bone graft is improved with addition of xenograft compared with autogenous bone graft. However, conclusions drawn from this systematic review should be interpreted with caution since only four studies using three-dimensional radiographic measurements were included.
PubMed: 33959236
DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2021.12101