Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract Purpose Maxillary sinus floor elevation is a safe and effective surgical technique for achieving vertical bone height, performed through either a lateral or crestal approach. The latter includes both the osteotome technique and osseodensification. The aim of this systematic review was to co...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Implant Dentistry |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00615-9 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850132819975602176 |
|---|---|
| author | Carlos Manuel Cobo-Vázquez Sonia García-Rodríguez María Eugenia Colmenares-Otero Luis Miguel Sáez-Alcaide Jorge Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann Cristina Madrigal Martínez-Pereda Cristina Meniz-Garcia |
| author_facet | Carlos Manuel Cobo-Vázquez Sonia García-Rodríguez María Eugenia Colmenares-Otero Luis Miguel Sáez-Alcaide Jorge Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann Cristina Madrigal Martínez-Pereda Cristina Meniz-Garcia |
| author_sort | Carlos Manuel Cobo-Vázquez |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Purpose Maxillary sinus floor elevation is a safe and effective surgical technique for achieving vertical bone height, performed through either a lateral or crestal approach. The latter includes both the osteotome technique and osseodensification. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the outcomes of the classic crestal sinus lift technique and the osseodensification sinus lift approach in terms of the bone gain, marginal bone loss, survival rate, follow-up time and complications. Methods This review was performed following PRISMA guidelines. An electronic search was conducted across three databases: (1) The National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed); (2) SCOPUS; and (3) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). The Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration tool for evaluating risk of bias. A meta-analysis for random effects was carried out for implant survival, residual bone height and bone gain. Results Thirteen studies were included, ten studies performed the osteotome (OST) approach and three performed the osseodensification (OD) approach, with a total of 519 sites treated. The residual bone height was 5.94 and 5.00 mm for OD and OST, respectively. For bone gain, similar results were found for both groups, being 3.37 mm for OD and 3.18 mm for OST. For both groups, the most used diameter and length of the implant was 4 and 10 mm, respectively, and the implant survival rates ranged from 94.1% to 100%. OST technique reflected a complication rate of 14.32%, compared to the OD technique, which showed a complication rate of 2.78%. Conclusions It can be concluded that the maxillary sinus lift by osseodesinfication approach is a safe, predictable and successful technique compared to the osteotome approach, with similar outcomes regarding bone gain which is an important parameter for implant placement. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-5bd1afd476944d4b835aee0ec1c1e6cf |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2198-4034 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Implant Dentistry |
| spelling | doaj-art-5bd1afd476944d4b835aee0ec1c1e6cf2025-08-20T02:32:07ZengSpringerOpenInternational Journal of Implant Dentistry2198-40342025-05-0111111310.1186/s40729-025-00615-9Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysisCarlos Manuel Cobo-Vázquez0Sonia García-Rodríguez1María Eugenia Colmenares-Otero2Luis Miguel Sáez-Alcaide3Jorge Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann4Cristina Madrigal Martínez-Pereda5Cristina Meniz-Garcia6Department of Clinical Specialities. Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of MadridDepartment of Clinical Specialities. Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of MadridDepartment of Clinical Specialities. Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of MadridDepartment of Clinical Specialities. Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of MadridDepartment of Clinical Specialities. Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of MadridDepartment of Clinical Specialities. Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of MadridDepartment of Clinical Specialities. Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of MadridAbstract Purpose Maxillary sinus floor elevation is a safe and effective surgical technique for achieving vertical bone height, performed through either a lateral or crestal approach. The latter includes both the osteotome technique and osseodensification. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the outcomes of the classic crestal sinus lift technique and the osseodensification sinus lift approach in terms of the bone gain, marginal bone loss, survival rate, follow-up time and complications. Methods This review was performed following PRISMA guidelines. An electronic search was conducted across three databases: (1) The National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed); (2) SCOPUS; and (3) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). The Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration tool for evaluating risk of bias. A meta-analysis for random effects was carried out for implant survival, residual bone height and bone gain. Results Thirteen studies were included, ten studies performed the osteotome (OST) approach and three performed the osseodensification (OD) approach, with a total of 519 sites treated. The residual bone height was 5.94 and 5.00 mm for OD and OST, respectively. For bone gain, similar results were found for both groups, being 3.37 mm for OD and 3.18 mm for OST. For both groups, the most used diameter and length of the implant was 4 and 10 mm, respectively, and the implant survival rates ranged from 94.1% to 100%. OST technique reflected a complication rate of 14.32%, compared to the OD technique, which showed a complication rate of 2.78%. Conclusions It can be concluded that the maxillary sinus lift by osseodesinfication approach is a safe, predictable and successful technique compared to the osteotome approach, with similar outcomes regarding bone gain which is an important parameter for implant placement.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00615-9Maxillary sinus liftCrestal sinus liftOsseodensificationOsteotome |
| spellingShingle | Carlos Manuel Cobo-Vázquez Sonia García-Rodríguez María Eugenia Colmenares-Otero Luis Miguel Sáez-Alcaide Jorge Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann Cristina Madrigal Martínez-Pereda Cristina Meniz-Garcia Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis International Journal of Implant Dentistry Maxillary sinus lift Crestal sinus lift Osseodensification Osteotome |
| title | Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full | Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr | Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_short | Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_sort | clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques osteotome versus osseodensification a systematic review and meta analysis |
| topic | Maxillary sinus lift Crestal sinus lift Osseodensification Osteotome |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00615-9 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT carlosmanuelcobovazquez clinicalandradiographicevaluationfortwocrestalsinuslifttechniquesosteotomeversusosseodensificationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT soniagarciarodriguez clinicalandradiographicevaluationfortwocrestalsinuslifttechniquesosteotomeversusosseodensificationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT mariaeugeniacolmenaresotero clinicalandradiographicevaluationfortwocrestalsinuslifttechniquesosteotomeversusosseodensificationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT luismiguelsaezalcaide clinicalandradiographicevaluationfortwocrestalsinuslifttechniquesosteotomeversusosseodensificationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jorgecortesbretonbrinkmann clinicalandradiographicevaluationfortwocrestalsinuslifttechniquesosteotomeversusosseodensificationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT cristinamadrigalmartinezpereda clinicalandradiographicevaluationfortwocrestalsinuslifttechniquesosteotomeversusosseodensificationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT cristinamenizgarcia clinicalandradiographicevaluationfortwocrestalsinuslifttechniquesosteotomeversusosseodensificationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |