References : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [1]
Beretta M, Poli PP, Grossi GB, Pieroni S, Maiorana C. Long-term survival rate of implants placed in conjunction with 246 sinus floor elevation procedures: results of a 15-year retrospective study. J Dent. 2015;43:78–86.
Del Fabbro M, Corbella S, Weinstein T, Ceresoli V, Taschieri S. Implant survival rates after osteotome-mediated maxillary sinus augmentation: a systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14 Suppl 1:e159–168.
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;26:1158–64.
Pjetursson BE, Lang NP. Sinus floor elevation utilizing the transalveolar approach. Periodontol 2000 2014;66:59-71.
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;66:1426–38.
Bhattacharyya N. Bilateral chronic maxillary sinusitis after the sinus-lift procedure. Am J Otolaryngol. 1999;20:133–5.
Tidwell JK, Blijdorp PA, Stoelinga PJ, Brouns JB, Hinderks F. Composite grafting of the maxillary sinus for placement of endosteal implants. A preliminary report of 48 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992;21:204–9.
Timmenga NM, Raghoebar GM, Boering G, van Weissenbruch R. Maxillary sinus function after sinus lifts for the insertion of dental implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;55:936–9.
Carmeli G, Artzi Z, Kozlovsky A, Segev Y, Landsberg R. Antral computerized tomography pre-operative evaluation: relationship between mucosal thickening and maxillary sinus function. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22:78–82.
Manor Y, Mardinger O, Bietlitum I, Nashef A, Nissan J, Chaushu G. Late signs and symptoms of maxillary sinusitis after sinus augmentation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;110:e1–4.
Pignataro L, Mantovani M, Torretta S, Felisati G, Sambataro G. ENT assessment in the integrated management of candidate for (maxillary) sinus lift. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2008;28:110–9.
Shanbhag S, Karnik P, Shirke P, Shanbhag V. Cone-beam computed tomographic analysis of sinus membrane thickness, ostium patency, and residual ridge heights in the posterior maxilla: implications for sinus floor elevation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25:755–60.
Serial posts:
- Background : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- Methods : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [1]
- Methods : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [2]
- Methods : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [3]
- Results : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- Discussion : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [1]
- Discussion : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [2]
- Discussion : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [3]
- Conclusions : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- Abbreviations : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- References : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [1]
- References : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [2]
- References : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [3]
- References : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [4]
- Acknowledgements : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- Author information : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [1]
- Author information : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening [2]
- Rights and permissions : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- About this article : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- Table 1 CBCT measurements of sinus mucosal thickening : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- Table 2 Statistical results after inter-variable adjustment showing the association between recorded parameters and sinus mucosal thickening; p values that showed statistically significant differences are italicized : Dental implants and grafting success remain high despite large variations in maxillary sinus mucosal thickening
- Fig. 1. Figure illustrating the reference points of the CBCT measurements. A: most posterior point of the sinus wall; B: most anterior point of the sinus wall; C: mid-point between A and B; C1: measurement of mucosal thickening perpendicular to A–B line at point C; D: mid-point between A and C; D1: measurement of mucosal thickening perpendicular to A–B line at point D; E: mid-point between B and C; E1: measurement of mucosal thickening perpendicular to A–B line at point E; F: highest extension of thickened sinus membrane; G–H: height of residual alveolar bone (measured at the mid-point of the edentulous ridge/implant-planned site) : Dental implant
- Fig. 2. Figure illustrating the proposed mucosal thickening index. A ≤1 mm, indicating no thickening; B >1 mm but ≤2 mm, indicating minimal thickening; C >2 mm but ≤5 mm, indicating moderate thickening; D >5 mm, indicating severe thickening : Dental implant