Clinical Research Directory

Evaluation of Implant Stability Following Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation Through Piezoelectric Trans-crestal Approach Versus Crestal Implant Approach

Rehabilitation of the maxillary posterior region is a challenge in every-day clinical practice. Following extraction of maxillary molars, alveolar ridge atrophy along with maxillary sinus pneumatization decrease the bone volume and increase implant placement complexity (Lyu et al., 2023). Several surgical procedures have been proposed to overcome these complications, including; short implants (Bechara et al., 2017), tilted implants (Meng and Zhang, 2022) as well as different sinus floor elevation techniques (Irinakis, 2011, Bishbish et al., 2023, Dragonas et al., 2023). Crestal maxillary sinus floor elevation has been considered a predictable and less invasive approach, providing sufficient vertical ridge height with high rates of implant survival (Guruprasad et al., 2024). However, there's limited body of evidence comparing the efficacy of different trans-crestal approaches as PISE and crestal implant approach with no bone graft. Thus, further clinical trials are recommended to determine whether the adjunctive use of piezoelectric instrumentation in internal sinus elevation offers significant clinical advantages over the crestal implant approach.