Para depositar en Docta Complutense, identifícate con tu correo @ucm.es en el SSO institucional: Haz clic en el desplegable de INICIO DE SESIÓN situado en la parte superior derecha de la pantalla. Introduce tu correo electrónico y tu contraseña de la UCM y haz clic en el botón MI CUENTA UCM, no autenticación con contraseña.
 

Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta‐analysis

dc.contributor.authorCobo Vázquez, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorGarcía-Rodríguez, Sonia
dc.contributor.authorColmenares-Otero, María Eugenia
dc.contributor.authorSáez-Alcaide, Luis Miguel
dc.contributor.authorCortés Bretón Brinkmann, Jorge
dc.contributor.authorMadrigal Martínez-Pereda, Cristina María
dc.contributor.authorMeniz García, Cristina María
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-28T09:01:32Z
dc.date.available2025-05-28T09:01:32Z
dc.date.issued2025-05-16
dc.description.abstractPurpose: 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.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Especialidades Clínicas Odontológicas
dc.description.facultyFac. de Odontología
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.statuspub
dc.identifier.citationCobo-Vázquez CM, García-Rodríguez S, Colmenares-Otero ME, Sáez-Alcaide LM, Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann J, Madrigal Martínez-Pereda C, Meniz-Garcia C. Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Implant Dent. 2025 May 16;11(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s40729-025-00615-9
dc.identifier.dois40729-025-00615-9
dc.identifier.essn2198-4034
dc.identifier.officialurlhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00615-9
dc.identifier.pmid40377845
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://journalimplantdent.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40729-025-00615-9#additional-information
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40377845/
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/120538
dc.issue.number1
dc.journal.titleInternational Journal of Implant Dentistry
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.initial36
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject.cdu616.314-089.843:612.753
dc.subject.keywordCrestal sinus lift
dc.subject.keywordMaxillary sinus lift
dc.subject.keywordOsseodensification
dc.subject.keywordOsteotome
dc.subject.ucmOdontología (Odontología)
dc.subject.ucmCirugía bucofacial
dc.subject.ucmImplantes dentales
dc.subject.ucmSistema musculoesquelético
dc.subject.ucmDiagnóstico por imagen y medicina nuclear
dc.subject.unesco3299 Otras Especialidades Médicas
dc.subject.unesco3213.04 Cirugía de Huesos
dc.subject.unesco2209.90 Tratamiento Digital. Imágenes
dc.titleClinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift techniques: osteotome versus osseodensification. a systematic review and meta‐analysis
dc.typejournal article
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dc.volume.number11
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication6f9a4234-3582-47fd-9027-3dc4a75639b5
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationb3d08922-245d-473f-bd12-d176f463961e
relation.isAuthorOfPublication377d078b-3e35-4391-9e91-0483a4e68bb0
relation.isAuthorOfPublicatione9ca2f79-0fd4-4bfd-b42b-dec8f1aa627c
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery6f9a4234-3582-47fd-9027-3dc4a75639b5

Download

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Int J Implant Dent. 2025 May 16;11(1):36.pdf
Size:
3.65 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections