Membrane perforation in sinus floor elevation - piezoelectric device versus conventional rotary instruments for osteotomy: an experimental study
- PMID: 22376212
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00447.x
Membrane perforation in sinus floor elevation - piezoelectric device versus conventional rotary instruments for osteotomy: an experimental study
Abstract
Purpose: Sinus membrane perforation is the most common intraoperative complication of maxillary sinus floor elevation (MSFE) procedures and frequently causes postoperative problems. Piezoelectric devices have been claimed to reduce the frequency of membrane perforations although no clear evidence supports this view.
Materials and methods: Ten surgeons with different expertise levels performed 80 MSFEs in selected lamb heads, with rotary and piezoelectric instruments following standard protocols. After the procedures, specimens were coded and perforations or tears determined through a microscope.
Results: No significant differences in terms of thickness either of the sinus lateral wall (xi -xj = 73.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 45.3-191.8) or the membrane (xi -xj = 24.2; 95% CI = -29.4 to 77.9) were identified between the specimens allocated to each group. Nine membrane perforations (11.2%) occurred during the study, all within the lower expertise group. Membrane elevation by hand instruments caused five perforations (40%) in the rotary instrument group and one in the piezoelectric group. Expert surgeons produced no membrane perforations, the size of the antrostomy that was smaller in the piezoelectric group being the only significant difference between the rotary and piezoelectric groups.
Conclusions: The use of piezoelectric material for MSFE reduces the frequency of membrane perforation among surgeons with a limited experience.
Keywords: bone augmentation; dental implants; maxillary sinus floor elevation; membrane perforation; piezoelectric surgery.
© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Similar articles
-
A comparative study of the incidence of Schneiderian membrane perforations during maxillary sinus augmentation with a sonic oscillating handpiece versus a conventional turbine handpiece.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Apr;17(2):327-34. doi: 10.1111/cid.12110. Epub 2013 Jul 9. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015. PMID: 23837594
-
Schneiderian membrane perforation rate during sinus elevation using piezosurgery: clinical results of 100 consecutive cases.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007 Oct;27(5):413-9. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007. PMID: 17990437
-
Osteotomy and membrane elevation during the maxillary sinus augmentation procedure. A comparative study: piezoelectric device vs. conventional rotative instruments.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 May;19(5):511-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01498.x. Epub 2008 Mar 26. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008. PMID: 18371101 Clinical Trial.
-
Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device-a meta-analysis.Int J Implant Dent. 2018 Jan 29;4(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s40729-017-0114-2. Int J Implant Dent. 2018. PMID: 29376211 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Piezoelectric bone surgery for lateral sinus floor elevation compared with conventional rotary instruments: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2020;13(2):109-121. Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2020. PMID: 32424379
Cited by
-
Study of factors influencing preoperative detection of alveolar antral artery by CBCT in sinus floor elevation.Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 2;10(1):10820. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-67644-9. Sci Rep. 2020. PMID: 32616752 Free PMC article.
-
Piezosurgery in implant dentistry.Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2015 Nov 11;7:115-24. doi: 10.2147/CCIDE.S63466. eCollection 2015. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2015. PMID: 26635486 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources