Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2025
Assessment of guided lateral maxillary sinus lift procedure with simultaneous implant placement using stereolithographic surgical guide: a randomized controlled clinical study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hussein Wael, Younis Ahmed, Elrawdy Ahmad, ElSholkamy Mohamed
Аннотация
AIM: The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of the stereolithographic surgical guide in reducing intraoperative and postoperative complication during lateral sinus lift operation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A parallel randomized controlled prospective clinical study was conducted on fourteen patients requiring thirty dental implants in the posterior maxilla and diagnosed with reduced vertical bone height. Lateral Maxillary Sinus Lift procedure with simultaneous implant placement was performed to all patients. Stereolithographic surgical guides for lateral window osteotomy and implant drilling and placement were used in the study group, while lateral osteotomy and implant drilling and placement was done freehand in the control group. A cone beam computed tomography was taken immediately and six months post-sinus lifting. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were assessed, pain and edema were assessed using visual analogue scale and vertical bone was assessed using fusion module of cone beam computed tomography.
RESULTS: All dental implants demonstrated high survival rates with no statistically significant difference observed in intraoperative or postoperative complications. In terms of new vertical bone gain, both groups exhibited satisfactory and successful outcomes. Concerning pain, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups except after two days, the study group showed statistically significantly lower pain score than the control group. While regarding the severity of edema, the study group showed statistically significantly higher prevalence of moderate and severe edema than control group which showed higher prevalence of mild edema.
CONCLUSION: According to the current study it has been concluded that there was no remarkable difference between the outcomes of both methods. The study protocol and its consent form were approved by the ethical committee of Suez Canal University (No.432/2021); and registered retrospectively on 23 April 2024 on PACTR (PACTR20240875463218) (pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID = 30442).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A parallel randomized controlled prospective clinical study was conducted on fourteen patients requiring thirty dental implants in the posterior maxilla and diagnosed with reduced vertical bone height. Lateral Maxillary Sinus Lift procedure with simultaneous implant placement was performed to all patients. Stereolithographic surgical guides for lateral window osteotomy and implant drilling and placement were used in the study group, while lateral osteotomy and implant drilling and placement was done freehand in the control group. A cone beam computed tomography was taken immediately and six months post-sinus lifting. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were assessed, pain and edema were assessed using visual analogue scale and vertical bone was assessed using fusion module of cone beam computed tomography.
RESULTS: All dental implants demonstrated high survival rates with no statistically significant difference observed in intraoperative or postoperative complications. In terms of new vertical bone gain, both groups exhibited satisfactory and successful outcomes. Concerning pain, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups except after two days, the study group showed statistically significantly lower pain score than the control group. While regarding the severity of edema, the study group showed statistically significantly higher prevalence of moderate and severe edema than control group which showed higher prevalence of mild edema.
CONCLUSION: According to the current study it has been concluded that there was no remarkable difference between the outcomes of both methods. The study protocol and its consent form were approved by the ethical committee of Suez Canal University (No.432/2021); and registered retrospectively on 23 April 2024 on PACTR (PACTR20240875463218) (pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID = 30442).