Discussion : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [1]
Although the lateral sinus floor elevation is a proven clinically successful technique [14], the indirect SFE approach is favorable among clinicians because it does not require a second surgery site and hence cause less trauma and discomfort for the patient [14,15,16]. However, this method has its drawbacks, such as a higher risk of membrane perforation, a decreased space for using surgical instruments, and limitation in elevation heights when using the conventional techniques [3, 16, 17].
The osteotome technique originally described by Tatum 1994 has been shown microscopically to elevate the sinus floor for 5 mm without causing perforations [18]. Thus, this technique should not be used when the intended elevation height is more than 5 mm [19]. Therefore, a need for transalveolar approach that can elevate the membrane safely and for elevation heights greater than 5 mm has risen, Tatum described a modified approach to his osteotome technique in which bone particles are pushed in the sinus. The addition of bone will prevent direct contact between the instruments and the membrane [20]. Recently, many methods for SFE have been described as an alternative for the osteotome technique. Most of this techniques fall under two categories: using an inflatable device such as a balloon or using hydraulic pressure, both of which have been shown to reduce the rate of membrane perforation [6, 7, 13, 21, 22]. Soltan and Smiler described the use of the balloon and concluded that it is a highly successful and easy to perform procedure [6]. Recently, many systems have been developed which rely on hydraulic pressure to lift the sinus mucosa including the Jeder-System (Jeder GmbH, Vienna, Austria) which consists of a drill with a chamber which is filled with saline solution. After the initial drilling is done, the drill is connected to a pump that produces high hydraulic pressure; the pressure is used to break the sinus floor and to lift the membrane [23]. Also, OSSTEM implants introduced the CAS kit as a method for preparing the osteotomy and elevating the membrane through hydraulic pressure.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Background : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [1]
- Background : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [2]
- Methods : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [1]
- Methods : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [2]
- Results : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Discussion : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [1]
- Discussion : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [2]
- Discussion : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [3]
- Conclusions : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Change history : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- References : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [1]
- References : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [2]
- References : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [3]
- Author information : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Ethics declarations : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Rights and permissions : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- About this article : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Table 1 The association between the methods used the following variables: occurrence of perforation, length of perforation, and the time of operation : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Table 2 The results of logistic regression of method used on the occurrence of perforation : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study
- Fig. 1. Determination of the remaining bone height (RBH) on the CBCT image : Comparison of three different methods of internal
- Fig. 2. The exposed mesial aspect of the sinus : Comparison of three different methods of internal
- Fig. 3. a The balloon in a resting position. b The inflated balloon [12] : Comparison of three different methods of internal
- Fig. 4. The inflated balloon while elevating the sinus membrane (The balloon is seen from the medial.) : Comparison of three different methods of internal
- Fig. 5. a The CAS drill has four blades and an inverse conical shape. b The hydraulic lifter : Comparison of three different methods of internal
- Fig. 6. The hydraulic lifter stabilized in the osteotomy before injecting the saline : Comparison of three different methods of internal