References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [2]
Geminiani A, Tsigarida A, Chochlidakis K, Papaspyridakos PV, Feng C, Ercoli C. A meta-analysis of complications during sinus augmentation procedure. Quintessence Int. 2017;48(3):231–40.
Esposito M, Felice P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;5:CD008397.
Galindo-Moreno P, Avila G, Fernandez-Barbero JE, Aguilar M, Sánchez-Fernández E, Cutando A, et al. Evaluation of sinus floor elevation using a composite bone graft mixture. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18(3):376–82.
Marchetti C, Pieri F, Trasarti S, Corinaldesi G, Degidi M. Impact of implant surface and grafting protocol on clinical outcomes of endosseous implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22(3):399–407.
Krekmanov L. A modified method of simultaneous bone grafting and placement of endosseous implants in the severely atrophic maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995;10(6):682–8.
Watzek G, Weber R, Bernhart T, Ulm C, Haas R. Treatment of patients with extreme maxillary atrophy using sinus floor augmentation and implants: preliminary results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998;27(6):428–34.
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(7):1426–38.
Papa F, Cortese A, Maltarello MC, Sagliocco R, Felice P, Claudio PP. Outcome of 50 consecutive sinus lift operations. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;43(4):309–13.
Lindenmuller IH, Lambrecht JT. Sinus floor elevation and implantation—a retrospective study. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed. 2006;116(2):142–9.
Penarrocha-Diago M, Penarrocha-Diago M, Sánchez-Recio C, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Romero-Millan J. Osteotomy in direct sinus lift. A comparative study of the rotary technique and ultrasound. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012;17(3):e457–61.
Kaptein ML, de Putter C, de Lange GL, Blijdorp PA. Survival of cylindrical implants in composite grafted maxillary sinuses. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998;56(12):1376–80. discussion 80-1
Cha HS, Kim A, Nowzari H, Chang HS, Ahn KM. Simultaneous sinus lift and implant installation: prospective study of consecutive two hundred seventeen sinus lift and four hundred sixty-two implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014;16(3):337–47.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- Review : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [1]
- Review : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [2]
- Review : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [3]
- Review : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [4]
- Review : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [5]
- Review : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [6]
- Conclusions : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [1]
- References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [2]
- References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [3]
- References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [4]
- References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [5]
- References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [6]
- References : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis [7]
- Acknowledgements : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- Author information : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- Ethics declarations : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- Rights and permissions : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- About this article : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- Table 1 Overview on the event rate (with lower and upper limits, z value), weight and significance (p values) for conventional approach and random effect : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- Table 2 Overview on the event rate (with lower and upper limits, z value), weight and significance (p values) for piezosurgical approach and random effect : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device—a meta-analysis
- Fig. 1. Result of the search strategy and included and excluded studies : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sin
- Fig. 2. Forest plot of random effects meta-analysis of the incidence of Schneiderian membrane perforation using conventional rotative instruments. The weighted average for the incidence rate of Schneiderian membrane perforation was 24% : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sin
- Fig. 3. Forest plot of random effects meta-analysis of the incidence of Schneiderian membrane perforation using piezoelectric devices. The weighted average for the incidence rate of Schneiderian membrane perforation was 8% : Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sin