Techniques and Graft Materials Used in Maxillary Sinus Lift Procedure for Dental Implant Placement

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

  •   Noor Mohammed Al-Noori

  •   Fatima Ali Makawi

Abstract

Posterior quadrant of the maxilla consider as special challenges for use of implant active prostheses to restore dental function. Placement of Implant in the posterior part of maxilla influence hesitation due to the lack of sufficient alveolar bone height. This occurs due to the proximity of alveolar crest to the maxillary sinus because of sinus pneumatization, along with resorption of bone of the alveolar ridge secondary to tooth extraction, pathological lesion or trauma. Sinus lifting to augment atrophic maxillary posterior area to create space for implantation has been progressively widespread in latest years. In literatures 2 approaches have been designated for sinus lifting: the direct approach called also lateral approach and the indirect approach called also crestal approach.


Keywords: Grafting material, lifting technique, sinus anatomy, sinus lifting

References

Bathla SC, Fry RR, Majumdar K. Maxillary sinus augmentation. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2018; 22: 468–473.

Stelzle F, Benner KU. Evaluation of different methods of indirect sinus floor elevation for elevation heights of 10 mm: An experimental ex vivo study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011; 13: 124-133.

Sani E, Veltri M, Cagidiaco MC, Balleri P, Ferrari M. Sinus membrane elevation in combination with placement of blasted implants: A 3 year case report of sinus augmentation without grafting material. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 37: 966-969.

Woo I, Le BT. Maxillary sinus floor elevation: review of anatomy and two techniques, Implant Dent. 2004; 13: 28–32.

Van den Bergh JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJ, Tuinzing DB. Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations, Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000; 11: 256–265.

Sharan A, Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extractions: a radiographic study, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008; 23: 48–56.

Zijderveld SA, van den Bergh JP, Schulten EA, ten Bruggenkate CM. Anatomical and surgical findings and complications in 100 consecutive maxillary sinus floor elevation procedures, J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 66: 1426–1438.

Bell GW, Joshi BB, Macleod RI. Maxillary sinus disease: diagnosis and treatment, Br Dent J. 2011; 210: 113–118, 17.

Standring S. Gray's anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice. 41st ed. London: Elsevier Health Sciences. 2015.

Jeong KI, Kim SG, Oh JS, You JS. Implants displaced into the maxillary sinus: a systematic review. Implant Dent. 2016; 25: 547–551.

Underwood AS. An inquiry into the anatomy and pathology of the maxillary sinus, J Anat Physiol. 1910; 44(Pt 4): 354–369.

Wen SC, Chan HL, Wang HL. Classification and management of antral septa for maxillary sinus augmentation, Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013; 33: 509–517.

Kim JH, Kim UC, Lee JY, Kim HC, Kim SN. A clinical & radiologic study of bone remodeling effects using rhBMP-2 for maxillary sinus graft. J Dent Implant Res. 2016; 35: 46–52.

Wen SC, Lin YH, Yang YC, Wang HL. The influence of sinus membrane thickness upon membrane perforation during transcrestal sinus lift procedure, Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015; 26(10): 1158–1164.

Yilmaz HG, Tozum TF. Are gingival phenotype, residual ridge height, and membrane thickness critical for the perforation of maxillary sinus? J Periodontol. 2012; 83: 420–425.

Flanagan D. Arterial supply of maxillary sinus and potential for bleeding complication during lateral approach sinus elevation. Implant Dent. 2005; 14: 336–338.

Bornstein MM, Scarfe WC, Vaughn VM, Jacobs R. Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: a systematic review focusing on guidelines, indications, and radiation dose risks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29(Suppl): 55–77.

Malina-Altzinger J, Damerau G, Grätz KW, Stadlinger PD. Evaluation of the maxillary sinus in panoramic radiography: a comparative study. Int J Implant Dent. 2015; 1: 17.

Gray CF, Redpath TW, Smith FW, Staff RT, Bainton R. Assessment of the sinus lift operation by magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999; 37: 285–289.

Gray CF, Staff RT, Redpath TW, Needham G, Renny NM. Assessment of maxillary sinus volume for the sinus lift operation by three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000; 29: 154–158.

Senel FC, Duran S, Icten O, Izbudak I, Cizmeci F. Assessment of the sinus lift operation by magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 44: 511–514.

Lim D, Parumo R, Chai MB, Shanmuganathan J. Transnasal endoscopy removal of dislodged dental implant: a case report. J Oral Implantol. 2017; 43: 228–231.

Jang HY, Kim HC, Lee SC, Lee JY. Choice of graft material in relation to maxillary sinus width in internal sinus floor augmentation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 68: 1859–1868.

Reiser GM, Rabinovitz Z, Bruno J, Damoulis PD, Griffin TJ. Evaluation of maxillary sinus membrane response following elevation with the crestal osteotome technique in human cadavers. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001; 16(6): 833-40.

Cavicchia F, Bravi F, Petrelli G. Localized augmentation of the maxillary sinus floor through a coronal approach for the placement of implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2001; 21(5): 475-85.

Nkenke E, Stelzle F. Clinical outcomes of sinus floor augmentation for implant placement using autogenous bone or bone substitutes: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002; 20: 124-33.

Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg. 1980; 38(8): 613-6.

Caudry S, Landzberg M. Lateral window sinus elevation technique: managing challenges and complications. J Can Dent Assoc. 2013; 79: d101.

Zheng J, Zhang S, Lu E, Yang C, Zhang W, Zhao J. Endoscopic lift of the maxillary sinus floor in Beagles. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014; 52: 845–849.

Piattelli M, Favero GA, Scarano A, Orsini G, Piattelli A. Bone reactions to anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss) used in sinus augmentation procedures: a histologic long-term report of 20 cases in humans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14(6): 835-40.

Hallman M, Lundgren S, Sennerby L. Histologic analysis of clinical biopsies taken 6 months and 3 years after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with 80% bovine hydroxyapatite and 20% autogenous bone mixed with fibrin glue. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2001; 3: 87 96.

Artzi Z, Nemcovsky CE, Dayan D. Nonceramic hydroxyapatite bone derivative in sinus augmentation procedures: clinical and histomorphometric observations in 10 consecutive cases. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2003; 23: 381–389.

Cochran DL, Schenk R, Buser D, Wozney JM, Jones AA. Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 stimulation of bone formation around endosseous dental implants. Journal of Periodontology. 1999; 70: 139-150.

Simunek A, Kopecka D, Cierny M. The use of oxidized regenerated cellulose (Surgicel®) in closing Schneiderian membrane tears during the sinus lift procedure. West Indian Medical Journal. 2005; 54: 398-399.

Gray CF, Redpath TW, Bainton R, Smith FW. Magnetic resonance imaging assessment of a sinus lift operation using reoxidised cellulose (Surgicel) as graft material. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001;12:526–530.

Hernández-Alfaro F, Torradeflot MM, Marti C. Prevalence and management of Schneiderian membrane perforations during sinus-lift procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19: 91–98.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

How to Cite
Al-Noori, N. M., & Makawi, F. A. (2022). Techniques and Graft Materials Used in Maxillary Sinus Lift Procedure for Dental Implant Placement. European Journal of Dental and Oral Health, 3(4), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejdent.2022.3.4.198