Background:Grafting the floor of the maxillary sinus has become the most common surgical intervention for increasing alveolar bone height prior to the placement of endosseous dental implants in the posterior maxilla. Outcomes of this procedure may be affected by specific surgical techniques, simultaneous versus delayed implant placement, use of barrier membranes over the lateral window, selection of graft material, and the surface characteristics and the length and width of the implants. Rationale:The primary objective of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of the sinus augmentation procedure and compare the results achieved with various surgical techniques, grafting materials, and implants. Focused Question: In patients requiring dental implant placement, what is the effect on implant survival of maxillary sinus augmentation versus implant placement in the non-grafted posterior maxilla? Search Protocol: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Oral Health Group Specialized Trials Register, and the Database...

/pdf/effect-of-maxillary-sinus-augmentation-on-the-survival-of-4uoigk3y04.pdf

Effect of Maxillary Sinus Augmentation on the Survival of Endosseous Dental Implants. A Systematic Review

Objectives: The objectives of this systematic review were to assess the survival rate of implants placed in sites with transalveolar sinus floor elevation. Material and Methods: An electronic search was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on transalveolar sinus floor elevation, with a mean follow-up time of at least 1 year after functional loading. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates/ year proportions. Results: The search provided 849 titles. Full-text analysis was performed for 176 articles, resulting in 19 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of these studies indicated an estimated annual failure rate of 2.48% (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.37‐4.49%) translating to an estimated survival rate of 92.8% (95% CI): 87.4‐96.0%) for implants placed in transalveolarly augmented sinuses, after 3 years in function. Furthermore, subject-based analysis revealed an estimated annual failure of 3.71% (95% CI: 1.21‐11.38%), translating to 10.5% (95% CI: 3.6‐28.9%) of the subjects experiencing implant loss over 3 years. Conclusion: Survival rates of implants placed in transalveolar sinus floor augmentation sites are comparable to those in non-augmented sites. This technique is predictable with a low incidence of complications during and post-operatively.

A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation

Purpose A variety of techniques and materials have been used to establish the structural base of osseous tissue for supporting dental implants. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the most successful technique(s) to provide the necessary alveolar bone to place a dental implant and support long-term survival. Methods A systematic online review of a main database and manual search of relevant articles from refereed journals were performed between 1980 and 2005. Updates and additions were made from September 2004 to May 2005. The hard tissue augmentation techniques were separated into 2 anatomic sites, the maxillary sinus and alveolar ridge. Within the alveolar ridge augmentation technique, different surgical approaches were identified and categorized, including guided bone regeneration (GBR), onlay/veneer grafting (OVG), combinations of onlay, veneer, interpositional inlay grafting (COG), distraction osteogenesis (DO), ridge splitting (RS), free and vascularized autografts for discontinuity defects (DD), mandibular interpositional grafting (MI), and socket preservation (SP). All identified articles were evaluated and screened by 2 independent reviewers to meet strict inclusion criteria. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were further evaluated for data extraction. The initial search identified a total of 526 articles from the electronic database and manual search. Of these, 335 articles met the inclusion criteria after a review of the titles and abstracts. From the 335 articles, further review of the full text of the articles produced 90 articles that provided sufficient data for extraction and analysis. Results For the maxillary sinus grafting (SG) technique, the results showed a total of 5,128 implants placed, with follow-up times ranging from 12 to 102 months. Implant survival was 92% for implants placed into autogenous and autogenous/composite grafts, 93.3% for implants placed into allogeneic/nonautogenous composite grafts, 81% for implants placed into alloplast and alloplast/xenograft materials, and 95.6% for implants placed into xenograft materials alone. For alveolar ridge augmentation, a total of 2,620 implants were placed, with follow-up ranging from 5 to 74 months. The implant survival rate was 95.5% for GBR, 90.4% for OVG, 94.7% for DO, and 83.8% for COG. Other techniques, such as DD, RS, SP, and MI, were difficult to analyze because of the small sample size and data heterogeneity within and across studies. Conclusions The maxillary sinus augmentation procedure has been well documented, and the long-term clinical success/survival (> 5 years) of implants placed, regardless of graft material(s) used, compares favorably to implants placed conventionally, with no grafting procedure, as reported in other systematic reviews. Alveolar ridge augmentation techniques do not have detailed documentation or long-term follow-up studies, with the exception of GBR. However, studies that met the inclusion criteria seemed to be comparable and yielded favorable results in supporting dental implants. The alveolar ridge augmentation procedures may be more technique- and operator-experience-sensitive, and implant survival may be a function of residual bone supporting the dental implant rather than grafted bone. More in-depth, long-term, multicenter studies are required to provide further insight into augmentation procedures to support dental implant survival.

Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement

Purpose This review evaluated (1) the success of different surgical techniques for the reconstruction of edentulous deficient alveolar ridges and (2) the survival/success rates of implants placed in the augmented areas. Materials and methods Clinical investigations published in English involving more than 10 consecutively treated patients and mean follow-up of at least 12 months after commencement of prosthetic loading were included. The following procedures were considered: onlay bone grafts, sinus floor elevation via a lateral approach, Le Fort I osteotomy with interpositional grafts, split ridge/ridge expansion techniques, and alveolar distraction osteogenesis. Full-text articles were identified using computerized and hand searches by key words. Success and related morbidity of augmentation procedures and survival/success rates of implants placed in the augmented sites were analyzed. Results and conclusion A wide range of surgical procedures were identified. However, it was difficult to demonstrate that one surgical procedure offered better outcomes than another. Moreover, it is not yet known if some surgical procedures, eg, reconstruction of atrophic edentulous mandibles with onlay autogenous bone grafts or maxillary sinus grafting procedures in case of limited/moderate sinus pneumatization, improve long-term implant survival. Every surgical procedure presents advantages and disadvantages. Priority should be given to those procedures which are simpler and less invasive, involve less risk of complications, and reach their goals within the shortest time frame. The main limit encountered in this literature review was the overall poor methodological quality of the published articles. Larger well-designed long-term trials are needed.

Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry

Objectives: To analyze publications related to augmentation procedures and to evaluate the success of different surgical techniques for ridge reconstruction and the survival/success rates of implants placed in the augmented areas.

Material and methods: Clinical investigations published in English involving at least 5 patients and with a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included. The following procedures were considered: a) Guided bone regeneration (GBR); 2) Onlay bone grafts; 3) Inlay grafts; 4) Bone splitting for ridge expansion (RE); 5) Distraction osteogenesis (DO); and 6) Revascularized flaps. Success rates of augmentation procedures and related morbidity, as well as survival and success rates of implants placed in the augmented sites were analyzed.

Results: Success rates of surgical procedures ranged from 60% to 100% for GBR, from 92% to 100% for onlay bone grafts, from 98% to 100% for ridge expansion techniques, from 96,7% to 100% for DO, and was 87.5% for revascularized flaps, whereas survival rates of implants ranged from 92% to 100% for GBR, from 60% to 100% for onlay bone grafts, from 91% to 97.3% for RE, from 90.4% to 100% for DO, and, finally, was 88.2% for revascularized flaps.

Conclusion: On the basis of available data it was shown that it was difficult to demonstrate that a particular surgical procedure offered better outcome as compared to another. The main limit encountered in this review has been the overall poor methodological quality of the published articles. Therefore larger well-designed long term trials are needed.

http://coimplante.odo.br/Biblioteca/Short%20implants/Augmentation%20procedures%20for%20the%20rehabilitation%20of%20deficient%20edentulous%20-%20Chiapasco%20et%20al.pdf

Augmentation procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous ridges with oral implants

Aim: A randomized-controlled clinical pilot trial was designed to evaluate photodynamic therapy (PDT) for its bactericidal potential and clinical effect in the treatment of periodontitis.

Material and Methods: Fifty-eight subjects with chronic periodontitis were included. Each subject exhibited at least three active periodontal pockets 5 mm or deeper, bleeding on probing and the presence of Porphyromonas gingivalis. Subjects were randomly assigned to a control group treated by subgingival ultrasound only or to a study group additionally treated by PDT. Baseline clinical values of gingival index, bleeding on probing, probing pocket depths and clinical attachment levels were recorded and re-evaluated 90 days later. Pathogen screening for P. gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia and Treponema denticola was conducted at baseline as well as 10, 42 and 90 days after treatment.

Results: P. gingivalis was significantly reduced in both groups (laser group: p=0.020; control group: p=0.042). No significant reductions of T. forsythia and T. denticola were observed in either group. For the microbial parameters, no significant difference was found between the laser and the control group. All clinical parameters were significantly reduced in both groups after treatment. The mean probing pocket depths decreased from 5.79 to 4.55 mm in the laser group and from 5.54 to 4.51 in the control group. The intergroup difference was not significant (p=0.82). Bleeding on probing was reduced from 100% evaluated at baseline to 47% in the laser group and 59% in the control group. The intergroup difference was not significant (p=0.28). No significant differences were observed in any other parameters.

Conclusion: Application of a single cycle of PDT was not effective as an adjunct to ultrasonic periodontal treatment. There were no extra reductions in pocket depths and bleeding on probing. With regard to eradicating bacteria, however, there are no additional effects as compared with conventional treatment alone.

Clinical effectiveness of photodynamic therapy in the treatment of periodontitis.

Background: Various forms of stress behavior were documented and in patients with periodontitis their relationship with periodontal disease was investigated. Methods: Eighty-nine patients with different forms of chronic periodontitis were included in this retrospective case-control study. They were all undergoing periodontal treatment at the Department of Dental Prosthetics, University of Graz, or a private dental practice. The control group consisted of 63 persons employed in health care at the Clinic of Graz. All participants completed a stress coping questionnaire of 114 items and 19 actional and intrapsychic stress coping modes. The questionnaire served as a psychodiagnostic survey aimed at collecting data on stress coping strategies. Clinical attachment loss (CAL) served as the clinical parameter. Results: With the help of a factor analysis with α factorization and Varimax rotation, 5 factors were extracted from the 19 subtests. The reliability of the questionnaire was less than 0.70 only for subtest...

Coping With Stress: Its Influence on Periodontal Disease

Transfer of the precise position of implants to a master cast is a prerequisite for accurate and passive fit of the superstructure. Implants lack the mobility of natural teeth and, therefore, inaccurate frameworks result in stress within the mechanical parts and the implant-bone interface. Various impression methods have been described to achieve accurate reproduction of the intra-oral relation of the implants. The aim of this experimental study was to compare three different impression materials (polyether, polyvinyl siloxane, hydrocolloid) with the Frialit(R)-2 system and with the indirect technique. In addition, the use of transfer caps (TCs) to improve transfer precision was tested with all three materials. All measurements were performed using a three-dimensional (3D) co-ordinate measuring machine that is capable of locating points in space and calculating the relative distortions as angles of tilt (rot-XY, rot-XZ, rot-YZ) and 3D displacement. The results suggest that addition-silicone (a-silicone) and polyether are the materials of choice for implant transfer procedures. The use of TCs resulted in a significantly reduced rotation in the XY-plane but did not improve the absolute 3D displacement. A-silicone with the use of TCs proved to be most precise. Comparison between polyether and polyvinyl siloxane showed significant differences in the XY-rotation and the 3D displacement in favour of the silicone. Because the mean distortions between the original model and the master casts were about 100 microm, absolutely precise fit may be unattainable owing to the physical properties of the materials. Further studies will have to evaluate the amount of tolerable stress at the implant-bone interface.

Comparison of the transfer precision of three different impression materials in combination with transfer caps for the Frialit®‐2 system

This follow-up study evaluated clinical and radiographic parameters of dental implants placed in combination with guided bone regeneration with barrier membranes All implants functioned well up to 60 months after insertion Forty-one patients, with a total of 72 augmented implants, who participated in a regular maintenance protocol, were investigated Annual Periotest values (median value, − 3) revealed stable periimplant conditions and sustained osseointegration At 6 months and annually thereafter up to five years, the radiographic evaluation yielded mean bone losses of 08, 125, 139, 142, 142 and 139 mm, respectively, with a range from 0 to 35 mm No implant failures or losses were recorded The results demonstrated stable periimplant conditions up to five years after membrane-protected osseous regeneration, with no significant differences in the radiographic bone level in regard to region, jaw or bone graft Premature membrane exposure resulted in a significantly higher crestal bone loss up to 24 months The newly formed bone appeared to be able to withstand functional loading for up to 60 months in a predictable manner

Evaluation of implants placed with barrier membranes. A restrospective follow-up study up to five years.

The present follow-up study evaluated clinical and radiographic parameters of dental implants placed with simultaneous guided bone regeneration with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) membranes. All implants were functioning well 24 months after insertion. In all, 63 patients with a total of 91 e-PTFE-augmented implants were integrated in a regular maintenance protocol. Modified periodontal data of 85 implants in 59 patients were recorded at 24 months and indicated no difference to implants placed in sufficient pristine bone. The mean plaque score (mplI) was 0.29, 74% of the sites showed no plaque. The sulcular probing depth ranged from 1 to 7 mm with a mean of 2.6 mm (SD +/- 0.8). Of the sites 96.5% were < or = 4 mm deep, in 49% of them probing resulted in bleeding. Periotest values 6 and 24 months (mean: -3.4 and -3.4) after placement revealed stable peri-implant conditions and sustained osseointegration. The radiographic evaluation performed 6, 12 and 24 months post insertion yielded a mean bone loss of 0.93, 1.36 and 1.51 mm ranging from 0 to 4 mm. The short-term results of our clinical study demonstrated stable peri-implant conditions 2 years after membrane-protected osseous regeneration. The newly formed bone seemed to be able to withstand functional loading in a predictable manner after 18 months.

Raoul Polansky

Papers

Clinical effectiveness of photodynamic therapy in the treatment of periodontitis.

Coping With Stress: Its Influence on Periodontal Disease

Comparison of the transfer precision of three different impression materials in combination with transfer caps for the Frialit®‐2 system

Evaluation of implants placed with barrier membranes. A restrospective follow-up study up to five years.

Guided bone regeneration with barrier membranes--a clinical and radiographic follow-up study after 24 months.