Clinical oral implants research · 2011
Complications associated with implant migration into the maxillary sinus cavity.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Galindo-Moreno Pablo, Padial-Molina Miguel, Avila Gustavo, Rios Hector F, Hernández-Cortés Pedro, Wang Hom-Lay
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Migration of dental implants into the maxillary sinus is an uncommon, but increasingly reported complication. Implant migration may result from initial lack of primary stability, intrasinusal and nasal pressure changes, autoimmune reaction to the implant or incorrect distribution of occlusal forces. This retrospective study aims at analyzing the factors that may influence implant migration into the maxillary sinus cavity.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fourteen patients presenting a total 15 implants that migrated into the maxillary sinus were recruited. Diagnosis of this complication was based on imaging techniques, such as cone beam computerized tomography scan and panoramic radiography. Clinical data were recorded in all cases and processed for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: ABH was below 6 mm in the majority of cases. However, almost 50% of the patients did not receive any site preparation treatment prior to implant insertion. Five patients (33.3%) were treated by osteotome techniques, but only one of them had bone grafting. Therefore, 73.3% of sites did not receive any biomaterial to increase available bone height. The most common complication-associated factors found on this study were related to implant design (cylindrical), implant dimension (diameter), implant restoration/rehabilitation method (partial removable denture), site-specific anatomy (initial residual bone height between 5 and 6.9 mm), demographics (age), and biomaterials.
CONCLUSION: Patient selection and proper treatment planning, as well as the application of the appropriate sinus augmentation technique, are critical aspects that should be controlled to minimize the risk of implant migration into the maxillary sinus cavity.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fourteen patients presenting a total 15 implants that migrated into the maxillary sinus were recruited. Diagnosis of this complication was based on imaging techniques, such as cone beam computerized tomography scan and panoramic radiography. Clinical data were recorded in all cases and processed for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: ABH was below 6 mm in the majority of cases. However, almost 50% of the patients did not receive any site preparation treatment prior to implant insertion. Five patients (33.3%) were treated by osteotome techniques, but only one of them had bone grafting. Therefore, 73.3% of sites did not receive any biomaterial to increase available bone height. The most common complication-associated factors found on this study were related to implant design (cylindrical), implant dimension (diameter), implant restoration/rehabilitation method (partial removable denture), site-specific anatomy (initial residual bone height between 5 and 6.9 mm), demographics (age), and biomaterials.
CONCLUSION: Patient selection and proper treatment planning, as well as the application of the appropriate sinus augmentation technique, are critical aspects that should be controlled to minimize the risk of implant migration into the maxillary sinus cavity.