Transsinusoidal lateral nasal floor augmentation for implant placement in the atrophic premaxilla: A within‐patient, 5‐year, prospective comparative study

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesTo evaluate the clinical outcome for implants placed with transsinusoidal‐lateral nasal cavity augmentation (NA) compared to implants placed in maxillary sinus augmentation (SA).Materials and MethodsIn 28 atrophic edentulous maxillary regions (14 patients bi‐maxillary), a lateral window approach was used to perform transsinusoidal‐lateral NA (TSLNA) combined with maxillary SA. After healing period of about 6 months, each patient received bimaxillary one anterior implant located in the pre‐maxilla having lateral NA and 2–3 implants in the maxillary posterior region with SA. In a prospective follow‐up evaluation, clinical implant outcome (survival/success rates) and peri‐implant health (mucositis/peri‐implantitis) were assessed and compared between implants placed in TSLNA (n = 28) and SA (n = 58).ResultsAt the year‐1, year‐3, and year‐5 evaluation, neither patient‐based nor implant‐based comparisons revealed differences for marginal bone level reduction between implants placed in TSLNA (5‐year overall: 1.11 ± 0.26 mm) and SA (5‐year overall: 1.07 ± 0.30 mm), although with a significant (p < .001) continuous reduction over the observation time. At the year‐5 evaluation, all implants (n = 86) and restorations (n = 14) were still in situ (survival 100%) and showed an implant‐based incidence of peri‐implant mucositis/peri‐implantitis of 14.3%/0% in TSLNA and 6.9%/3.4% in SA corresponding to 21.4%/0% and 28.6%/7.1% for implant‐based evaluation. In addition, the implant success rate did not differ between NA and SA at implant‐ (100%/ 98.8%) and patient‐based (100%/97.6%) evaluation.ConclusionThe findings obtained show TSLNA as an effective method for implant placement of adequate length and direction in the atrophic premaxilla providing for success rates comparable to those of implants placed in SA.