Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacy
Introduction: This research aimed to study the impact of initial anatomical conditions on decision-making for subantral augmentation in a single tooth gap and to compare the clinical efficiency of closed hydrodynamic sinus lift and lateral sinus floor augmentation (LSFA) for single tooth restoration...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
EDP Sciences
2024-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Oral Medicine and Oral Surgery |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.jomos.org/articles/mbcb/full_html/2024/04/mbcb240181/mbcb240181.html |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841554723169107968 |
|---|---|
| author | Artemchuk Artem Yahodka Bohdan Osmanov Bekir Kopchak Andrii Chepurnyi Yurii |
| author_facet | Artemchuk Artem Yahodka Bohdan Osmanov Bekir Kopchak Andrii Chepurnyi Yurii |
| author_sort | Artemchuk Artem |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: This research aimed to study the impact of initial anatomical conditions on decision-making for subantral augmentation in a single tooth gap and to compare the clinical efficiency of closed hydrodynamic sinus lift and lateral sinus floor augmentation (LSFA) for single tooth restoration. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 96 patients who underwent subantral augmentation with simultaneous implantation in a single tooth gap. Patients were divided: 50 in the “Open” LSFA group and 46 in the “Closed” hydrodynamic lift group. A two-stage protocol was applied, with data on age, intervention site, implant dimensions, and bone height analyzed. Results: Mean residual bone height differed: 3.341 ± 1.433 mm in “Open” and 4.437 ± 1.741 mm in “Closed” (p = 0.001). Median bone height post-surgery was 9.5 mm in “Open” and 8.5 mm in “Closed” (p = 0.0031), with significant bone height increase (p < 0.00001). No implant or graft removals were needed. Conclusion: Residual alveolar ridge height, cortical bone thickness, and sinus wall thickness are key criteria in selecting a protocol. Both techniques achieved effective results, even with initial bone heights below 5 mm. LSFA led to greater bone height increase, while both approaches provide reliable options for stable implant integration. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a52957103b7741abb79d65b6567734a5 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2608-1326 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-01-01 |
| publisher | EDP Sciences |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Oral Medicine and Oral Surgery |
| spelling | doaj-art-a52957103b7741abb79d65b6567734a52025-01-08T11:12:01ZengEDP SciencesJournal of Oral Medicine and Oral Surgery2608-13262024-01-013042810.1051/mbcb/2024038mbcb240181Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacyArtemchuk Artemhttps://orcid.org/0009-0008-6602-2954Yahodka Bohdanhttps://orcid.org/0009-0009-8058-9081Osmanov Bekirhttps://orcid.org/0009-0000-6900-0103Kopchak AndriiChepurnyi Yuriihttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4393-3938Introduction: This research aimed to study the impact of initial anatomical conditions on decision-making for subantral augmentation in a single tooth gap and to compare the clinical efficiency of closed hydrodynamic sinus lift and lateral sinus floor augmentation (LSFA) for single tooth restoration. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 96 patients who underwent subantral augmentation with simultaneous implantation in a single tooth gap. Patients were divided: 50 in the “Open” LSFA group and 46 in the “Closed” hydrodynamic lift group. A two-stage protocol was applied, with data on age, intervention site, implant dimensions, and bone height analyzed. Results: Mean residual bone height differed: 3.341 ± 1.433 mm in “Open” and 4.437 ± 1.741 mm in “Closed” (p = 0.001). Median bone height post-surgery was 9.5 mm in “Open” and 8.5 mm in “Closed” (p = 0.0031), with significant bone height increase (p < 0.00001). No implant or graft removals were needed. Conclusion: Residual alveolar ridge height, cortical bone thickness, and sinus wall thickness are key criteria in selecting a protocol. Both techniques achieved effective results, even with initial bone heights below 5 mm. LSFA led to greater bone height increase, while both approaches provide reliable options for stable implant integration.https://www.jomos.org/articles/mbcb/full_html/2024/04/mbcb240181/mbcb240181.htmlhydrodynamic subantral augmentationlateral sinus floor augmentationclosed sinus liftmaxillary sinus floorsingle tooth replacement |
| spellingShingle | Artemchuk Artem Yahodka Bohdan Osmanov Bekir Kopchak Andrii Chepurnyi Yurii Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacy Journal of Oral Medicine and Oral Surgery hydrodynamic subantral augmentation lateral sinus floor augmentation closed sinus lift maxillary sinus floor single tooth replacement |
| title | Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacy |
| title_full | Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacy |
| title_fullStr | Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacy |
| title_short | Closed (hydrodynamic) versus open (lateral sinus floor) subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement: criteria of decision-making and clinical efficacy |
| title_sort | closed hydrodynamic versus open lateral sinus floor subantral augmentation for single tooth replacement criteria of decision making and clinical efficacy |
| topic | hydrodynamic subantral augmentation lateral sinus floor augmentation closed sinus lift maxillary sinus floor single tooth replacement |
| url | https://www.jomos.org/articles/mbcb/full_html/2024/04/mbcb240181/mbcb240181.html |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT artemchukartem closedhydrodynamicversusopenlateralsinusfloorsubantralaugmentationforsingletoothreplacementcriteriaofdecisionmakingandclinicalefficacy AT yahodkabohdan closedhydrodynamicversusopenlateralsinusfloorsubantralaugmentationforsingletoothreplacementcriteriaofdecisionmakingandclinicalefficacy AT osmanovbekir closedhydrodynamicversusopenlateralsinusfloorsubantralaugmentationforsingletoothreplacementcriteriaofdecisionmakingandclinicalefficacy AT kopchakandrii closedhydrodynamicversusopenlateralsinusfloorsubantralaugmentationforsingletoothreplacementcriteriaofdecisionmakingandclinicalefficacy AT chepurnyiyurii closedhydrodynamicversusopenlateralsinusfloorsubantralaugmentationforsingletoothreplacementcriteriaofdecisionmakingandclinicalefficacy |