Clinical and radiographic outcomes of lateral sinus floor elevation with simultaneous hydrophilic implants placement: A retrospective study of 2–5 years

Abstract

AbstractAimsTo investigate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of a chemically modified sandblasted large‐grit acid‐etched implant (hydrophilic) in lateral sinus floor elevation (LSFE), compared with a conventional one (hydrophobic).Materials and MethodsA retrospective study design was adopted. Patients who received LSFE with simultaneous implant placement were recruited. According to different types of implant surfaces, patients were divided into two groups (the hydrophilic group and the hydrophobic group). Implant survival rate (SR), endo‐sinus bone stability on the radiographs, mean probing depths, percentage of bleeding on probing, marginal bone loss, and patient satisfaction were evaluated.ResultsA total of 106 patients with 180 implants (hydrophilic:101, hydrophobic:79) in 119 maxillary sinuses were included. The follow‐up period ranged from 2 to 5 years. Three hydrophobic implants and one hydrophilic implant in four different patients failed. The SR of the hydrophilic group was higher than that of the hydrophobic group but without a significant difference (p > .05). The change and change rate of endo‐sinus bone height (ΔESBH and RΔESBH) and bone volume (ΔESBV and RΔESBV) in the hydrophilic group were less than those in the hydrophobic group, with a significant difference at 6 months after implantation. No other significant difference was found between the two groups.ConclusionWithin the limitations of this study, both hydrophilic and hydrophobic implants were suitable for LSFE with predictable clinical outcomes. Meanwhile, hydrophilic implants could contribute to the grafted endo‐sinus bone stability during healing time.