Results : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique [1]
All patients tolerated the procedure without major complications. Minor complications included postoperative swelling, edema, and pain that were managed by antibiotic and anti-inflammatory drugs. All implants were successfully osseo-integrated and loaded after about 6 months.
The floor was lifted without perforation in 83.33% of cases. The lifter was able to raise and stretch the sinus membrane safely. However, it varied according to the thickness of the membrane.
The direct observation of the sinus membrane showed that it is stretchable and can be easily elevated in eight cases where the membrane morphology was classified as thick (group B), whereas in the other four cases (group A), the membrane was thin and hardly accepted the lifting procedure (Tables 1 and 2).
Mann-Whitney U test (Table 3) was used for comparison between membrane thickness and the three different morphologies. It showed a statistically significant difference between the three membrane patterns. The polyp type showed the highest statistically significantly mean membrane thickness when compared to the flat or irregular shapes, whereas the flat and irregular membranes showed no differences between their mean membrane thickness. Chi-square test (Tables 2 and 4) showed that perforation rate in different morphologies was near to significant that could be attributed to the small sample size who accepted to do a window on the lateral sinus wall.
The membrane was successfully raised under direct endoscopic guidance. Regarding the elevation technique, the perforation was monitored in two cases (16.67%) under the extraordinary magnification of the endoscope. One case was early detected from the lateral approach, whereas both cases were detected from the crestal osteotomy site. Both cases were managed using PRF to seal the perforation. The implants were then immediately inserted without further complications.
There was a statistically significant relation between both groups in terms of their perforation liability, where the membrane thickness of less than 2 mm showed the highest rate of perforation (P = 0.008).
Serial posts:
- Introduction : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Patients and methods : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique [1]
- Patients and methods : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique [2]
- Results : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique [1]
- Results : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique [2]
- Discussion : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- References : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique [1]
- References : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique [2]
- Acknowledgements : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Author information : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Ethics declarations : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Rights and permissions : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- About this article : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Table 1 Descriptive statistics of membrane thickness and perforation rate : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Table 2 Chi square test showing perforation rate among different groups : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Table 3 Descriptive statistics, results of Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests for comparison between membrane thicknesses of different morphologies : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Table 4 Chi square test showing perforation rate by different morphologies : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus membrane elevation technique
- Fig. 1. A trephined hole (4 mm bone) in the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus to allow entrance of the endoscope : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus m
- Fig. 2. Malleting instruments supplied from InnoBioSurg (IBS) Company, Korea. a magic sinus splitter: used to widen and split the crest. b magic sinus lifter: used to lift the available bone with its attached membrane : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus m
- Fig. 3. Endoscopic view from the lateral sinus wall showing the dome-shape elevation of sinus lining : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus m
- Fig. 4. Schematic drawing showing entrance of the endoscope from the crestal osteotomy site after sinus membrane elevation to assess the integrity of the membrane : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus m
- Fig. 5. Endoscopic view from the crestal osteotomy site showing perforation of the sinus lining under the power of magnification and illumination of the endoscope : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus m
- Fig. 6. Box plot representing mean values of membrane thicknesses for the investigated groups : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus m
- Fig. 7. Box and Whisker plot representing median and range values of membrane thicknesses with different morphologies : Crestal endoscopic approach for evaluating sinus m