Maxillary Sinus Lift
Conditions
Brief summary
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 transcresta sinus lifting procedures are recommended. This study compares sinus lifting using the conventional osteotome versus the osseodensification with densah burs.
Detailed description
a total of 12 patients with missing maxillary premolars or molars and with limited vertical bone height below the maxillary sinus floor will receive implants either with osteotome or with Densah burs transcrestal sinus lifting to compare clinically and radiographically transcrestal sinus lifting with Densah burs and osteotome with simultaneous implant placement
Interventions
PROCEDUREoseodensification sinus lifting
application of first densah bur with densifying mood (reverse) counterclockwise, 1200 revolution per minute until the sinus is reached then use a wider densah bur with the same mode and bouncing motion to elevate the sinus floor up to 3 mm in 1mm increments.
PROCEDUREosteotome sinus lifting
drilling implant site with consecutive drills short of the sinus floor by 1-2mm , using osteotome in appropriate size and application of one tap until sinus floor is elevated, using the final drill for the desired implant diameter
Sponsors
Hams Hamed Abdelrahman
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 50 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patient with missing maxillary premolas and molars * Vertical bone height of 5-8 mm * Non smokers * Good oral hygiene
Exclusion criteria
* Bad oral hygiene * maxillary sinusitis * Presence of infection or periapical lesions in adjacent teeth * Bruxism or clenching * Alcoholism * Medically compromised patients with a condition that affect the procedure * Multiple sinus septa
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| implant stability | at 6 months | Using the Osstell, The result is presented as an ISQ value of 1-100. The higher the ISQ, the more stable the implant |
| change in bone height | at baseline and 6 months | using CBCT |
| change in bone density | at baseline and 6 months | using CBCT |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Pain scores | at 2 weeks | 10-point Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). (0-1= None, 2-4= Mild, 5-7= Moderate, 8-10= Severe) |
| edema scores | at 2 weeks | The pitting is graded on a scale of +1 to +4 as follows: * +1 (trace) slight indentation rapid return to normal. * +2 (mild) the indentation returns to normal in a few seconds. * +3 (moderate) 6 mm indentation rebounds in 10-20 seconds. * +4 (severe) 8 mm indentation rebounds in more than 30 seconds. |
Countries
Egypt
Contacts
Primary ContactMohammed T Elghobashy, BDS
Outcome results
None listed