Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Feb;40(1):17-20.
doi: 10.5125/jkaoms.2014.40.1.17. Epub 2014 Feb 25.

Survival rate of Astra Tech implants with maxillary sinus lift

Wook-Jae Yoon  1 , Kyung-In Jeong  1 , Jae-Seek You  1 , Ji-Su Oh  1 , Su-Gwan Kim  1
Affiliations

Survival rate of Astra Tech implants with maxillary sinus lift

Wook-Jae Yoon et al. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Feb.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical survival rate of Astra Tech implants in the maxillary molar region performed with sinus lift and bone graft.

Materials and methods: Ninety-nine Astra Tech implants (Osseospeed) placed in the maxillary molar region using sinus lift from September 2009 to February 2012 were selected with a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. The height of alveolar bone, sinus approach technique, bone material and implant survival rate were evaluated.

Results: Of the 99 implants, the survival rate was 90.9%; 8 implants failed within 1 year after implant placement, and 1 implant failed 1 year after implant loading. All failed implants were placed with sinus lift simultaneously. The average height of alveolar bone before implant placement was 6.9 mm, while the height of alveolar bone of failed implants was 2.1 mm, on average.

Conclusion: Astra Tech implants placed in the maxillary molar region had generally good survival rates, but the relationship between reduced pre-implant alveolar bone height and implant failure requires further attention.

Keywords: Dental implants; Sinus floor augmentation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Radiographic measurement of residual bone height (A: mesial residual bone height, B: distal residual bone height). A : X or B : X=actual residual alveolar bone height : actual implant height.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Chaushu G, Mardinger O, Calderon S, Moses O, Nissan J. The use of cancellous block allograft for sinus floor augmentation with simultaneous implant placement in the posterior atrophic maxilla. J Periodontol. 2009;80:422–428. - PubMed
    1. Nyström E, Ahlqvist J, Legrell PE, Kahnberg KE. Bone graft remodelling and implant success rate in the treatment of the severely resorbed maxilla: a 5-year longitudinal study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;31:158–164. - PubMed
    1. Cricchio G, Sennerby L, Lundgren S. Sinus bone formation and implant survival after sinus membrane elevation and implant placement: a 1- to 6-year follow-up study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22:1200–1212. - PubMed
    1. Bruschi GB, Crespi R, Capparè P, Gherlone E. Transcrestal sinus floor elevation: a retrospective study of 46 patients up to 16 years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14:759–767. - PubMed
    1. Hürzeler MB, Quiñones CR, Kirsch A, Gloker C, Schüpbach P, Strub JR, et al. Maxillary sinus augmentation using different grafting materials and dental implants in monkeys. Part I. Evaluation of anorganic bovine-derived bone matrix. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997;8:476–486. - PubMed