Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Experimental study on penetration of dental implants into the maxillary sinus at different depths

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the dental implant penetration into the maxillary sinus cavity in different depths on implant and sinus health in a dog model.

Materials and methods

The study sample included eight titanium dental implant placed in four female dogs immediately after extraction of the first maxillary molar in the palatal socket and assigned into four groups according to the protruding of implant tips (control group A = 0 mm, and study groups B, C, and D with protrusion of 1, 2, and 3 mm, respectively). The bone blocks of the implants were harvested 5 months postoperatively and evaluated by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and histological analysis.

Results

The whole groups showed no signs of inflammation during the 5-month period of the study. The tips of the implants in group B with penetrating depths of 1 mm were found to be fully covered with newly formed bone. The tips of the implants in group C with penetrating depths of 2 mm were exposed in the sinus cavity and showed partially new bone coverage, while depths of 3 mm in group D were found to have no bone formation and the dental implant fixture sites were communicated with the sinus cavity. No significant differences were found among the groups regarding implant stability.

Conclusion

Despite the protrusion extents, penetration of dental implant into the maxillary sinus with membrane perforation does not compromise the sinus health and the implant in canine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Atwood DA (1971) Reduction of residual ridges: a major oral disease entity. J Prosthet Dent 26(3):266–279. doi:10.1016/0022-3913(71)90069-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cawood JI, Howell RA (1988) A classification of the edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 17(4):232–236. doi:10.1016/S0901-5027(88)80047-X

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Friberg B, Jemt T, Lekholm U (1991) Early failures in 4,641 consecutively placed Brånemark dental implants: a study from stage 1 surgery to the connection of completed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 6(2):142–146

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chanavaz M (1990) Maxillary sinus: anatomy, physiology, surgery, and bone grafting related to implantology—eleven years of surgical experience (1979-1990). J Oral Implantol 16:199–209

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schwartz-Arad D, Herzberg R, Dolev E (2004) The prevalence of surgical complications of the sinus graft procedure and their impact on implant survival. J Periodontol 75(4):511–516. doi:10.1902/jop.2004.75.4.511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shlomi B, Horowitz DMDI, Kahn A, Dobriyan A, Chaushu DMDG (2004) The effect of sinus membrane perforation and repair with Lambone on the outcome of maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a radiographic assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 19(4):559–562

    Google Scholar 

  7. Karabuda C, Arisan V, Özyuvaci H (2006) Effects of sinus membrane perforations on the success of dental implants placed in the augmented sinus. J Periodontol 77(12):1991–1997. doi:10.1902/jop.2006.060102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Valentini P, Abensur DJ (2003) Maxillary sinus grafting with an organic bovine bone: a clinical report of long-term results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 18(4):556–560

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tasoulis G, Yao S, Fine J (2011) The maxillary sinus: challenges and treatments for implant placement. Compend Contin Educ Dent 32(1):10–14

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lim T, Csillag A, Irinakis T (2004) Intentional angulation of an implant to avoid a pneumatized maxillary sinus: a case report. J Can Dent Assoc 70(3):164–169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Khoury F (1999) Augmentation of the sinus floor with mandibular bone block and simultaneous implantation: a 6-year clinical investigation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 14(4):557–564

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Brånemark PI, Adell R, Albrektsson T, Lekholm U, Lindström J, Rockler B (1984) An experimental and clinical study of osseointegrated implants penetrating the nasal cavity and maxillary sinus. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 42(8):497–505

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Reiser GM, Rabinovitz DDSZ, Bruno MSJ, Damoulis PD, Griffin DTJ (2001) Evaluation of maxillary sinus membrane response following elevation with the crestal osteotome technique in human cadavers. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 16(6):833–840

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Timmenga NM, Raghoebar GM, Boering G, Weissenbruch R (1997) Maxillary sinus function after sinus lifts for the insertion of dental implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 55(9):936–939. doi:10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90063-X, discussion 940

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McDermott NE, Chuang S-K, Woo VV, Dodson TB (2003) Complications of dental implants: identification, frequency, and associated risk factors. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 18(6):848–855

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Malik N (2012) Textbook of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 3rd edn. Jaypee Brothers, New Delhi, pp 843–862

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Baumann A, Ewers R (1999) The minimal sinus floor elevation—limitation and possibilities in the atrophic maxilla. Mund Kiefer und Gesichtschirurgie 3(1):S70–73

  18. Petruson B (2004) Sinuscopy in patients with titanium implants in the nose and sinuses. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 38(2):86–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jung J-H, Choi B-H, Jeong S-M, Li J, Lee S-H, Lee H-J (2007) A retrospective study of the effects on sinus complications of exposing dental implants to the maxillary sinus cavity. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol 103(5):623–625. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.09.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jung JH, Choi BH, Zhu SJ, Lee SH, Huh JY, You TM et al (2006) The effects of exposing dental implants to the maxillary sinus cavity on sinus complications. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 102(5):602–605

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

    Lutfi Mohamed Mohamed Elhamruni, Hamdy Abdelmegeed Mohamed Marzook, Wael Mohamed Said Ahmed & Mohamed Abdul-Rahman

Authors
  1. Lutfi Mohamed Mohamed Elhamruni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hamdy Abdelmegeed Mohamed Marzook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wael Mohamed Said Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohamed Abdul-Rahman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lutfi Mohamed Mohamed Elhamruni.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Elhamruni, L.M.M., Marzook, H.A.M., Ahmed, W.M.S. et al. Experimental study on penetration of dental implants into the maxillary sinus at different depths. Oral Maxillofac Surg 20, 281–287 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-016-0568-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-016-0568-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation