References : Comparison of three different methods of internal sinus lifting for elevation heights of 7 mm: an ex vivo study [2]
author: Aghiad Yassin Alsabbagh, Mohammed Monzer Alsabbagh, Batol Darjazini Nahas, Salam Rajih | publisher: drg. Andreas Tjandra, Sp. Perio, FISID
Zitzmann NU, Scharer P. Sinus elevation procedures in the resorbed posterior maxilla. Comparison of the crestal and lateral approaches. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998;85(1):8–17.
Esposito M, Felice P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2014(5):CD008397.
Schwartz-Arad D, Herzberg R, Dolev E. The prevalence of surgical complications of the sinus graft procedure and their impact on implant survival. J Periodontol. 2004;75(4):511–6.
Emmerich D, Att W, Stappert C. Sinus floor elevation using osteotomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2005;76(8):1237–51.
Engelke W, Deckwer I. Endoscopically controlled sinus floor augmentation. A preliminary report. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997;8(6):527–31.
Sendyk W, Sendyk C. Reconstrução óssea por meio do levantamento do assoalho do seio maxilar. São Paulo: Santos. 2002:109–22.
Summers RB. The osteotome technique: part 3—less invasive methods of elevating the sinus floor. Compendium. 1994;15(6):698, 700, 2–4 passim; quiz 10.
Pommer B, Watzek G. Gel-pressure technique for flapless transcrestal maxillary sinus floor elevation: a preliminary cadaveric study of a new surgical technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(5):817–22.
Sotirakis EG, Gonshor A. Elevation of the maxillary sinus floor with hydraulic pressure. The Journal of oral implantology. 2005;31(4):197–204.
Jesch P, Bruckmoser E, Bayerle A, Eder K, Bayerle-Eder M, Watzinger F. A pilot-study of a minimally invasive technique to elevate the sinus floor membrane and place graft for augmentation using high hydraulic pressure: 18-month follow-up of 20 cases. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology. 2013;116(3):293–300.
Bae OY, Kim YS, Shin SY, Kim WK, Lee YK, Kim SH. Clinical outcomes of reamer- vs osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement: a 2-year retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(4):925–30.
Ahn SH, Park EJ, Kim ES. Reamer-mediated transalveolar sinus floor elevation without osteotome and simultaneous implant placement in the maxillary molar area: clinical outcomes of 391 implants in 380 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(7):866–72.
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
Zitzmann NU, Scharer P. Sinus elevation procedures in the resorbed posterior maxilla. Comparison of the crestal and lateral approaches. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998;85(1):8–17.
Esposito M, Felice P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2014(5):CD008397.
Schwartz-Arad D, Herzberg R, Dolev E. The prevalence of surgical complications of the sinus graft procedure and their impact on implant survival. J Periodontol. 2004;75(4):511–6.
Emmerich D, Att W, Stappert C. Sinus floor elevation using osteotomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2005;76(8):1237–51.
Engelke W, Deckwer I. Endoscopically controlled sinus floor augmentation. A preliminary report. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997;8(6):527–31.
Sendyk W, Sendyk C. Reconstrução óssea por meio do levantamento do assoalho do seio maxilar. São Paulo: Santos. 2002:109–22.
Summers RB. The osteotome technique: part 3—less invasive methods of elevating the sinus floor. Compendium. 1994;15(6):698, 700, 2–4 passim; quiz 10.
Pommer B, Watzek G. Gel-pressure technique for flapless transcrestal maxillary sinus floor elevation: a preliminary cadaveric study of a new surgical technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(5):817–22.
Sotirakis EG, Gonshor A. Elevation of the maxillary sinus floor with hydraulic pressure. The Journal of oral implantology. 2005;31(4):197–204.
Jesch P, Bruckmoser E, Bayerle A, Eder K, Bayerle-Eder M, Watzinger F. A pilot-study of a minimally invasive technique to elevate the sinus floor membrane and place graft for augmentation using high hydraulic pressure: 18-month follow-up of 20 cases. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology. 2013;116(3):293–300.
Bae OY, Kim YS, Shin SY, Kim WK, Lee YK, Kim SH. Clinical outcomes of reamer- vs osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement: a 2-year retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(4):925–30.
Ahn SH, Park EJ, Kim ES. Reamer-mediated transalveolar sinus floor elevation without osteotome and simultaneous implant placement in the maxillary molar area: clinical outcomes of 391 implants in 380 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(7):866–72.
- 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