Marys Medicine

A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla

Our reference: YJCMS 1862 AUTHOR QUERY FORM Please e-mail or fax your responses and any corrections to: Article Number: 1862 Fax: +31 2048 52789 Please check your proof carefully and mark all corrections at the appropriate place in the proof (e.g., by using on-screenannotation in the PDF file) or compile them in a separate list. Note: if you opt to annotate the file with software other thanAdobe Reader then please also highlight the appropriate place in the PDF file. To ensure fast publication of your paper pleasereturn your corrections within 48 hours.
For correction or revision of any artwork, please consult .
Any queries or remarks that have arisen during the processing of your manuscript are listed below and highlighted by flags inthe proof.
Query / Remark: Click on the Q link to find the query's location in text Please insert your reply or correction at the corresponding line in the proof Please provide organisation details for authors, "Udatta Kher, Kostantinos Siormpas, Ziv Mazor" if any.
The citation "Sakka et al., 2011" has been changed to match the author name/date in the reference list.
Please check.
Please provide the volume number or issue number or page range for the bibliography in Refs. "Hartlevet al., 2013, Jeong et al., 2014, Kotsakis et al., 2012, Nickenig et al., 2014, Sununliganon et al., 2014".
Please note that as per the journal style, if there are more than 6 authors, the first 6 author names are listedfollowed by ‘et al.' if the author group consists of 6 authors or fewer, all author names should be listed.
Therefore, in Ref(s). "Cochran et al, 2002; Galindo Moreno et al, 2008; Hartlev et al, 2013; Kfir et al,2009a; Kfir et al, 2009b; Vance et al, 2004" .Please list all names for up to 6 authors. For more than 6authors, use ‘et al.' after the first 6 authors.
Please confirm that given names and surnames have been identified correctly.
Please check this box or indicateyour approval if you have no corrections to make to the PDF file Thank you for your assistance.



YJCMS1862_proof ■ 6 September 2014 ■ 1/6 Contents lists available at Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla Kher , Andreas L. Ioannou *, Tarun Kumar Kostantinos Siormpas Miltiades E. Mitsias , Ziv Mazor Georgios A. Kotsakis Private Practice, Mumbai, India b Advanced Education Program in Periodontology, University of Minnesota, United States Division of Periodontology, Bapuji Dental College & Hospital, Davangere, India Private Practice, Larissa, Greece e Department of Periodontology & Implant Dentistry, New University College of Dentistry, NY, United States Private Practice, Ra'anana, Israel The aim of the present case series was to evaluate a simpli fied minimally invasive transalveolar sinus Paper received 2 March 2014 elevation technique utilizing calcium phosphosilicate (CPS) putty for hydraulic sinus membrane eleva- Accepted 15 August 2014 tion. The simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique is based on the application Available online xxx of hydraulic pressure via a viscous bone graft that acts as an incompressible fluid.
In this retrospective study, 21 patients (mean age: 48.5 ± 12 years) consecutively treated with the simplified minimally invasive transalveolar sinus elevation technique were evaluated. 28 tapered im- plants were placed in posterior maxillary sites with less than 6 mm of residual bone height as deter- Maxillary sinus/surgery mined radiographically on cone beam volumetric tomographs. No sinus membrane perforations were Surgical procedures noted and none of the patients complained of symptoms of sinusitis post-operatively (0%). The mean Minimally invasive gain in bone height post-operatively was 10.31 ± 2.46 mm (p < 0.001). All implants successfully inte- Putty bone substitute grated (100% success rate) and were loaded with cement-retained prostheses.
The proposed technique is a simple, efficacious, minimally invasive approach for sinus elevation that can be recommended for sites with at least 3 mm of residual height.
2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.
extraction, but is unrealistic for sites where anatomic limitations require more involved procedures (). One such Dental implant therapy has revolutionized the rehabilitation of case is the edentulous posterior maxilla.
both the form and the function of missing teeth. In contemporary Following extraction of teeth in the maxillary posterior region, dental practice, implant dentistry is recognized as the pneumatization of the maxillary sinus frequently occurs ( " for the rehabilitation of edentulous sites ). Depending on the degree of ). Patients' demands frequently dictate minimally invasive pneumatization in conjunction with the amount of coexisting surgery and timely delivery of restoration ( ridge resorption in an apical-coronal direction, different surgical ). This dual goal can be readily delivered by methods are employed for sinus lift surgery concepts such as immediate implant placement, or non-submerged implant placement in sites with adequate bone volume post- tionally, indirect, or transalveolar sinus floor elevation techniques are utilized when less than 5 mm of gain in bone height are sought, while more aggressive direct, or lateral-window ap- proaches are utilized in more advanced cases * Corresponding author. Advanced Education Program in Periodontology, University of Minnesota, 515 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United Direct sinus augmentation techniques have been shown to yield States. Tel.: þ1 651 395 9200.
E-mail address: (A.L. Ioannou).
very favorable outcomes in regards to bone regeneration in the 1010-5182/ 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.
Please cite this article in press as: Kher U, et al., A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla, Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.08.005 YJCMS1862_proof ■ 6 September 2014 ■ 2/6 U. Kher et al. / Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery xxx (2014) 1e6 sinus as well as very good success rates for implants placed in placement were included in this study. A minimum of 2 mm of bone height from the crest of the ridge to the floor of the sinus, of the major drawbacks associated with this type of technique is and 5 mm of minimum bone width were set as inclusion criteria.
patient satisfaction. Not only do patients undergo a more involved In addition, patients had to be healthy, non-smokers, with no procedure that has greater morbidity than conventional implant history of acute sinusitis or sinus pathology. Patients with placement, but they usually have to wait for several months prior to asymptomatic mild thickening of the sinus mucosa were included.
having their chief concern addressed, restoration of their functional Exclusion criteria included history of previous maxillary sinus surgery, chronic intake of any medication that affects bone heal- In a hypothetical case of ridge atrophy with coexisting pneu- ing (chronic steroid regimen, oral or IV bisphosphonates, etc.), matization of the sinus it is not infrequent for less than 5 mm of active periodontal disease, or periapical pathology of the adjacent residual bone height to remain in the posterior maxilla. In such a case a patient would routinely undergo direct sinus augmentation All patients were evaluated preoperatively for the need for sinus followed by implant placement approximately 6e9 months later, augmentation via cone beam tomography scans (CBCTs). The in- they would finally have the implant restored after 3e4 months of dications for the procedure and possible complications were healing, giving a total treatment time of approximately 1 year. It is reviewed with the patients and all patients agreed to proceed and only reasonable that this estimated waiting time would seem signed a consent form.
protracted to the majority of patients. In order to address this concern there are recent reports in the literature showing that the 2.2. Surgical technique and follow-up controlled elevation of the sinus floor using hydraulic pressure may extend the indications for transalveolar sinus augmentation tech- Patients were treated under local anesthesia and were pre- niques and reduce treatment time for patients medicated with a loading dose of amoxicillin/clavulanate potas- Utilizing the minimally invasive antral membrane sium administered 1 h prior to the surgical appointment elevation technique, were successful in achieving (875 mg/125 mg). Transcrestal sinus floor elevations were per- up to, or even beyond, 10 mm of gain in vertical bone height in a formed using a modification of the Summer's technique series of published reports (The ). The pre-operative height of the residual ridge rationale behind the use of a balloon is the even distribution of was assessed radiographically by an experienced implant surgeon hydraulic pressure at the membraneebone interface that results in . Local anesthesia was administered using 2% lidocaine atraumatic and safe elevation of the schneiderian membrane.
with 1:100,000 epinephrine to aid hemostasis of the area. Full Although efficacious, this technique has not become the standard thickness mucoperiosteal flaps were elevated in the posterior method for sinus elevation surgical procedures, possibly because of maxilla in order to gain access to the alveolar crest (A). An the need to purchase specialized equipment and for specific osteotomy was initiated at the ridge crest using a 2.0 mm pilot drill. The drill was stopped 1 mm short of the estimated height of The number of different surgical techniques for sinus the sinus floor. A periapical X-ray was obtained to verify the exact augmentation is only surpassed by the number of biomaterials position of the drill in proximity to the sinus floor. The osteotomy that have been used to overcome the challenge of insufficient was further widened using the drilling sequence recommended vertical bone height in the posterior maxilla by the implant manufacturer (Tapered Internal, BioHorizons, ). Various bone-grafting Birmingham, AL, USA). A small quantity of approximately 0.2 cm3 materials are frequently used in sinus lift procedures, including of CPS putty (NovaBone Dental Putty, NovaBone Products, Ala- autogenous bone, allografts, xenogeneic bone, and alloplastic bone chua, FL, USA) was delivered in the osteotomy via a narrow- tipped cartridge delivery system to act as a cushion prior to ). Recent data have tapping the sinus floor, and a 3 mm concave osteotome with shown that bone substitutes displaying a putty-like consistency depth markings and a mallet were used to carefully fracture the can present a valuable alternative in bone-grafting procedures floor of the sinus ,C). Care was taken not to push the osteotome into the sinus cavity to avoid inadvertent perforation The handling characteristics of putty bone substitutes of the sinus lining. Following the green-stick fracture of the floor have expanded the available array of treatment options for bone of the sinus, the bone substitute was directly injected into the grafting in narrow spaces, and their viscoelastic properties may be prepared sinus cavity via the cartridge delivery system. The car- exploited to increase the safety and predictability of sinus lift tridge tip fitted tightly in the osteotomy and allowed the insertion pressure due to injection of the graft to be delivered directly to The aim of the present case series was to evaluate a minimally the fractured inferior border of the sinus floor. 0.5 cm3 of CPS invasive transalveolar sinus elevation technique utilizing calcium putty was carefully injected into the osteotomy (). The hy- phosphosilicate (CPS) putty for hydraulic sinus membrane drostatic pressure exerted by the putty resulted in an atraumatic elevation of the sinus floor. CPS putty was added in increments until adequate elevation of the schneiderian membrane was seen 2. Materials and methods on intra-operative radiographs. An appropriately sized implant was placed at the level of the osseous crest using a manual torque 2.1. Patient selection wrench for enhanced tactile sensation (,E). The implants were initially engaged into the remaining native bone at the crest In this retrospective study, 21 patients consecutively treated in of the ridge and then slowly twisted in to engage in the viscous a dental clinic with a simplified, minimally invasive technique for CPS putty at the apical aspect of the osteotomy. Cover screws transalveolar sinus elevation were evaluated. Data related to age, were placed and primary flap closure was achieved utilizing a sex, implant location, intra-operative or post-operative compli- single interrupted suturing technique.
cations, implant stability, implant success and radiographic bone Postoperative instructions included oral administration of changes were recorded for all patients. Patients with treatment amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium (500 mg/125 mg three times a plans for sinus elevation surgery with simultaneous implant day) and ibuprofen (400 mg four times a day) for the first week Please cite this article in press as: Kher U, et al., A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla, Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.08.005



YJCMS1862_proof ■ 6 September 2014 ■ 3/6 U. Kher et al. / Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery xxx (2014) 1e6 Fig. 1. Pre-operative assessment of the cross-sectional radiographic image revealed less than 6 mm of preoperative height on the edentulous site.
post-operatively. Chlorhexidine rinses were prescribed twice daily for the above measurements (Image J, National Institutes of Health, for 2 weeks. The patients were instructed to limit themselves to a Bethesda, Maryland, USA).
soft diet for the first 2 weeks after surgery.
All patients were followed-up and assessed for implant survival Patients were followed-up at 24 h, 10 days and 3 months after and sinus complications on an individualized recall basis. Patients the surgery for post-surgical evaluation. Second stage surgery was were urged to contact the implant surgeon if any complication scheduled at 3e5 months post-sinus lift. During the implant arose between the recall appointments. Implant success was eval- uncovery appointment a periapical radiograph was taken to eval- uated clinically according to the criteria of .
uate the amount of vertical bone height gain and assess radio- Briefly, the examination consisted of clinical detection of implant graphic signs of implant integration (Radiographic mobility with the application of horizontal jiggling forces with the measurements of bone height from the crest to the floor of the rear end of two periodontal probes. Assessment of the peri-implant sinus where calculated twice by the same examiner at two different tissues was performed visually for signs of erythema and/or edema time intervals and the means of both measurements were reported.
and by palpation of the tissues surrounding the implant area.
The measurements included the scaling of the measured gain in Additionally, periapical radiographs were obtained to ascertain the vertical bone height based on the radiographic magnification of the absence of a continuous radiolucency around the implant. Patients implant to reduce any bias associated with possible elongation of were also interviewed for subjective symptoms and evaluation of the periapical radiographs. Specialized imaging software was used Fig. 2. (A) Intraoperative view of the residual ridge prior to initation of the osteotomy; (B) the tip of the cartridge inserted into the osteotomy site; (C) application of the osteotome to produce the required elevation of the sinus floor; (D) implant placement; (E) implants placed at the level of the osseous crest; (F) postoperative radiograph showing significant elevation of the sinus floor. Note the even fill of the sinus antrum by the flow of the viscous putty.
Please cite this article in press as: Kher U, et al., A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla, Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.08.005




YJCMS1862_proof ■ 6 September 2014 ■ 4/6 U. Kher et al. / Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery xxx (2014) 1e6 version 3.0.1, 2013 (2013-05-16, The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
A total of 29 implants (Tapered Internal, BioHorizons, Birming- ham, AL, USA) were placed in 21 consecutively treated patients with the simplified minimally invasive transalveolar sinus eleva- tion technique. The average patient age was 48.5 ± 12 years, and 9 patients were female. None of the patients were smokers. The re- cord of adverse events included mild to moderate postoperative edema for the first two or three postoperative days in most pa- Fig. 3. Note the narrow tip of the delivery system that allows intimate contact of the tients, and flap dehiscence in one patient that was caused by cartridge with the walls of the osteotomy.
trauma during mastication. No reports of hematoma, severe pain, or paroxysmal vertigo were noted in the present case series. The sinus elevation was combined with CPS putty in all cases. No sinus 2.3. Statistical analysis membrane perforations were noted and none of the patients complained of symptoms of sinusitis post-operatively (0%). The Patient characteristics and implant success were presented mean preoperative bone height was 4.34 ± 1.16 mm, while a sig- descriptively. The gain in bone height post-sinus surgery was nificant gain of 10.31 ± 2.46 mm was noted post-operatively assessed with a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The alpha level was set ¼ 0.05. Calculations were performed with statistical software, R Of the 29 implants placed, five were placed in 2nd premolar sites, 19 in 1st molar sites and five in 2nd molar sites. 28 of the 29 implants were placed simultaneously with the transalveolar sinus elevation with good to optimal primary implant stability in sites with residual bone height ranging from 2.8 mm to 6.5 mm. The remaining implant was placed after 6 months of healing due to the poor bone quality at the site. The residual bone height during the sinus augmentation surgery was 2.5 mm and the bone quality was deemed as poor (class IV) during implant site preparation, thus implant placement was aborted and the osteotomy was filled with CPS putty after elevation of the sinus to 13.5 mm. After 6 months of healing the site was re-entered and the implant was successfully placed with adequate primary stability. The implant was func- tionally loaded after 4 months of healing and remained successful throughout the follow-up period. Due to delayed implant place- ment this fixture was excluded from the analysis. All implants placed in this case series were left to heal for 4e5 months after implant placement and were then loaded with cement-retained prostheses. All of the simultaneously placed implants (28/28) were clinically stable and had no signs of peri-implant disease Fig. 4. Description of the radiographic assessment technique utilizing the known during a follow-up period of at least 1 year post-placement (min- implant length as reference for accuracy of measurements.
imum of 9 months post-loading) (100% success rate).
Fig. 5. (A) Clinical photo prior to treatment; (B) preoperative radiograph; (C) utilizing the osteotomy approach; (D) postoperative radiograph; (E) implant placed at the level of the osseous crest; (F) postoperative radiograph showing final prostheses.
Please cite this article in press as: Kher U, et al., A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla, Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.08.005 YJCMS1862_proof ■ 6 September 2014 ■ 5/6 U. Kher et al. / Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery xxx (2014) 1e6 membrane or a platelet-rich-fibrin membrane Increase in vertical bone height post-surgery.
Pre-operative bone height The consistency of the putty helps minimize membrane per- Post-operative bone height forations and associated adverse events during percussion with osteotomes. The technique also attempts to overcome the need to *Highly statistically significant (p < 0.001).
purchase the specialized equipment required to apply hydraulic pressure for the elevation of the schneiderian membrane, while simultaneously placing an adequate volume of the graft material in the site to allow for placement of the implants. Additional ad- vantages of this technique are its atraumatic nature, reduced The use of the minimally invasive antral membrane elevation chair-side times, reduced overall treatment duration, improved technique has a well-documented history of success in achieving patient comfort and minimal graft wastage. The alloplastic significant elevation of the sinus floor while sparing the need for biomaterial utilized has been shown to exhibit timely resorption more invasive direct sinus augmentation approaches and subsequent replacement with new vital bone in histological ). Implant placement simultaneously studies with residual graft fractions ranging from 4.3% to 11.5%, with this technique is highly predictable and yields success rates after 6 months of healing ranging from 95.2% to 100% for 6e18 months of follow-up ( The prompt bone turnover rate observed with CPS putty These results are compara- may provide a clinical benefit in terms of primary and secondary ble, yet slightly better than those reported in a large-scale survival implant stability that increases its suitability in implant surgery analysis of implants placed with the osteotome technique for in- direct sinus lift (). When comparing these re- Limitations of the technique proposed, are the necessary oper- sults it should be noted that the latter study reports survival rates of ator skill and experience needed for success, and the minimum up to 12 years of function, which may partially explain the differ- 3 mm of available bone height needed for achieving primary sta- ence in outcomes ().
bility for the implant. In one case where treatment was planned Results from the work of Kfir et al. (), and Mazor with the recommended technique and a baseline bone height of et al. ) are also well within the range of 92.7e96.9% 2.5 mm, adequate primary stability was not attainable due to the survival reported by a systematic review for sinus lift using the poor bone quality of the site and thus treatment was performed in a transalveolar approach In this review it staged manner. Therefore, when considering the loosely packed was concluded that implants placed in sites with remaining bone medullary bone frequently encountered in the posterior maxilla, height less than 5 mm have a reduced overall survival rate the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation ). Even though in most published cases, the technique should be recommended for sites with at least 3 mm of minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique has been residual bone height. The application of this technique should al- utilized in cases with less than 5 mm of residual bone height, ways be performed simultaneously with the placement of the survival of implants placed with this technique is very high, appropriate biomaterials in the osteotomy, as the use of a blood clot reaching up to 100% for 18 months of follow-up ).
or platelet concentrates alone may lead to unpredictable results The most significant benefit from the use of this technique is (). On the other hand, bone substitutes such as that it can achieve a gain in bone height comparable with that freeze-dried allografts, xenografts and mineralized alloplastic achieved with the use of the lateral window approach, while substitutes have all shown to be efficacious in sinus augmentation maintaining the advantage of the less invasive transalveolar procedures with results comparable to those observed with par- approach (The procedure is effective even in ticulated or block grafts of autogenous bone ( highly resorbed residual ridges, as significant quantities of grafting material can be rapidly introduced at the site with minimum risk of ). The use of bone morphogenetic protein 2 107 perforation. In general, the transalveolar sinus lift approach is has also shown very promising results in sinus augmentation sur- employed for sites with more than 6 mm of bone height pre- gery and if the currently available information is supported by operatively, while lateral window approaches are reserved for longitudinal studies, their clinical use may surpass that of bone cases with diminished baseline dimensions substitutes ).
). The currently proposed technique extends the application The presented technique may offer a more conservative proce- of the transalveolar approach to cases with significantly less bone dure with less postoperative morbidity, than the direct sinus height (3e6 mm).
augmentation approach. This technique can be successfully used In this prospective study, a simplified minimally invasive for sinus augmentation with simultaneous implant placement, as it transalveolar technique for sinus augmentation was utilized by may offer increased primary stability to the implant due to the exploiting the viscous consistency and flow characteristics of a new viscous nature of the utilized bone graft. These advantages make generation putty graft. The presented technique serves a dual this simplified approach a viable option for transalveolar sinus purpose: to minimize adverse events associated with the use of augmentation. A possible limitation of the present study is the osteotomes, and to provide an inexpensive technique for predict- relatively short-term follow-up observed, with a minimum obser- able elevation of the sinus membrane. A key determinant of success vation time of 9 months when loading was considered the baseline in the present study was careful case selection. On a patient level, and 12 months when placement was set as the baseline. None- only healthy individuals that were non-smokers were admitted to theless, it is well established that the vast majority of early and this study in order to avoid poor responders to treatment. On a site- medium-term implant failures occur at the time of second stage level, none of the cases had sinus septa in the selected implantation surgery rather than manifesting as failure to maintain osseointe- regions that may increase the risk of membrane perforation, or gration post-loading ). Yet, controlled technique failure. In such an unfortunate instance, a conventional clinical studies are required to longitudinally assess the efficacy of lateral-window sinus augmentation approach should be utilized to this surgical improvisation in comparison to direct sinus augmen- allow for increased visibility, isolation of the membrane perforation tation approaches and to unequivocally prove the proposed supe- and coverage of the perforation with an absorbable collagen riority of the presented technique on patient-related outcomes.
Please cite this article in press as: Kher U, et al., A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla, Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.08.005 YJCMS1862_proof ■ 6 September 2014 ■ 6/6 U. Kher et al. / Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery xxx (2014) 1e6 Kfir E, Kfir V, Goldstein M, Mazor Z, Kaluski E: Minimally invasive subnasal eleva- tion and antral membrane balloon elevation along with bone augmentation and implants placement. J Oral Implantol 38: 365e376, 2012 The simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation fir E, Kfir V, Kaluski E, Mazor Z, Goldstein M: Minimally invasive antral membrane technique is based on the application of hydraulic pressure by a balloon elevation for single-tooth implant placement. Quintessence Int 42: viscous bone graft that acts as an incompressible fluid. Therefore, simultaneously with the atraumatic elevation of the schneiderian fir E, Kfir V, Mijiritsky E, Rafaeloff R, Kaluski E: Minimally invasive antral mem- brane balloon elevation followed by maxillary bone augmentation and implant membrane, grafting of the maxillary sinus is achieved resulting in fixation. J Oral Implantol 32: 26e33, 2006 promotion of intrasinus bone formation, increased implant stability Kher U, Mazor Z, Stanitsas P, Kotsakis GA: Implants placed simultaneously with due to the viscoelastic nature of CPS putty, and a shorter operative lateral window sinus augmentation using a putty alloplastic bone substitute forincreased primary implant stability: a retrospective study. Implant Dent 23: time owing to the simultaneous elevation and grafting approach.
The proposed technique is a simple, efficacious, minimally invasive Kotsakis G, Chrepa V, Marcou N, Prasad H, Hinrichs J: Flapless alveolar ridge approach for sinus elevation that can be recommended for sites preservation utilizing the ‘socket-plug' technique: clinical technique and review of the literature. J Oral Implantol, 2012 (in press) with at least 3 mm of residual height.
Kotsakis GA, Salama M, Chrepa V, Hinrichs JE, Gaillard P: A randomized, blinded, controlled clinical study of particulate anorganic bovine bone mineral and calcium phosphosilicate putty bone substitutes for socket preservation. Int J flict of interest Oral Maxillofac Implants 29: 141e151, 2014a None of the authors has any conflicts of interest to this study.
Kotsakis GA, Joachim F, Saroff SA, Mahesh L, Prasad H, Rohrer M: Histomorpho- metric evaluation of a calcium-phosphosilicate bone substitute in extraction sockets. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 34: 233e239, 2014b Mahesh L, Salama MA, Kurtzman GM, Joachim FP: Socket grafting with calcium phosphosilicate alloplast putty: a histomorphometric evaluation. Compend Acocella A, Bertolai R, Nissan J, Sacco R: Clinical, histological and histomorpho- Contin Educ Dent 33: e109ee115, 2012 metrical study of maxillary sinus augmentation using cortico-cancellous fresh Mazor Z, Ioannou A, Venkataraman N, Kotsakis G: A minimally invasive sinus frozen bone chips. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 39(3): 192 augmentation technique using a novel bone graft delivery system. Int J Oral Chaves MD, de Souza Nunes LS, de Oliveira RV, Holgado LA, Filho HN, Implantol Clin Res 4: 78 Matsumoto MA, et al: Bovine hydroxyapatite (Bio-Oss®) induces osteocalcin, Mazor Z, Kfir E, Lorean A, Mijiritsky E, Horowitz RA: Flapless approach to maxillary sinus augmentation using minimally invasive antral membrane balloon eleva- J Craniomaxillofac Surg 40(8): e315ee320, Dec 2012 tion. Implant Dent 20: 434e438, 2011 Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Bruggenkate CM, et al: The use of reduced healing times Mazor Z, Peleg M, Gross M: Sinus augmentation for single-tooth replacement in the on ITI implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: early results posterior maxilla: a 3-year follow-up clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Im- from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 13: 144e153, plants 14: 55e60, 1999 Nickenig HJ, Wichmann M, Z€oller JE, Eitner S: 3-D based minimally invasive one- Dahlin C, Johansson A: Iliac crest autogenous bone graft versus alloplastic graft and stage lateral sinus elevation e a prospective randomized clinical pilot study guided bone regeneration in the reconstruction of atrophic maxillae: a 5-year with blinded assessment of postoperative visible facial soft tissue volume retrospective study on cost-effectiveness and clinical outcome. Clin Implant changes. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2014 (Epub ahead of print) Dent Relat Res 13: 305e310, 2011 Nkenke E, Schlegel A, Schultze-Mosgau S, Neukam FW, Wiltfang J: The endoscop- Del Fabbro M, Corbella S, Weinstein T, Ceresoli V, Taschieri S: Implant survival rates ically controlled osteotome sinus floor elevation: a preliminary prospective after osteotome-mediated maxillary sinus augmentation: a systematic review.
study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 17: 557e566, 2002 Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14(Suppl. 1): e159e168, 2012 Romero-Millan J, Martorell-Calatayud L, Penarrocha M, Garcia-Mira B: Indirect Del Fabbro M, Testori T, Francetti L, Weinstein R: Systematic review of survival rates osteotome maxillary sinus floor elevation: an update. J Oral Implantol 38(6): for implants placed in the grafted maxillary sinus. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 24: 565e577, 2004 Rothamel D, Wahl G, d'Hoedt B, Nentwig GH, Schwarz F, Becker J: Incidence and Ding X, Zhu XH, Wang HM, Zhang XH: Effect of sinus membrane perforation on the predictive factors for perforation of the maxillary antrum in operations to survival of implants placed in combination with osteotome sinus floor eleva- remove upper wisdom teeth: prospective multicentre study. Br J Oral Max- tion. J Craniofac Surg 24(2): e102 illofac Surg 45(5): 387e391, Jul 2007 Engelke W, Deckwer I: Endoscopically controlled sinus floor augmentation. A Sakka S, Krenkel C: Simultaneous maxillary sinus lifting and implant placement preliminary report. Clin Oral Implants Res 8: 527e531, 1997 with autogenous parietal bone graft: outcome of 17 cases. J Craniomaxillofac Ferrigno N, Laureti M, Fanali S: Dental implants placement in conjunction with Surg 39(3): 187e191, Apr 2011 osteotome sinus floor elevation: a 12-year life-table analysis from a prospective Sbordone C, Toti P, Guidetti F, Califano L, Pannone G, Sbordone L: Volumetric study on 588 ITI implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 17: 194e205, 2006 changes after sinus augmentation using blocks of autogenous iliac bone or Galindo-Moreno P, Avila G, Fernandez-Barbero JE, et al: Clinical and histologic freeze-dried allogeneic bone. A non-randomized study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg comparison of two different composite grafts for sinus augmentation: a pilot 42(2): 113e118, Mar 2014 clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 19: 755e759, 2008 Scheuber S, Hicklin S, Bragger U: Implants versus short-span fixed bridges: survival, Gassling V, Purcz N, Braesen JH, Will M, Gierloff M, Behrens E, et al: Comparison of complications, patients' benefits. A systematic review on economic aspects. Clin two different absorbable membranes for the coverage of lateral osteotomy sites Oral Implants Res 23(Suppl. 6): 50e62, 2012 in maxillary sinus augmentation: a preliminary study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg Summers RB: A new concept in maxillary implant surgery: the osteotome tech- 41(1): 76e82, Jan 2013 nique. Compendium 15(152): 54e56, 1994 Gutwald R, Haberstroh J, Stricker A, Rüther E, Otto F, Xavier SP, et al: Influence of Sununliganon L, Peng L, Singhatanadgit W, Cheung LK: Osteogenic efficacy of bone rhBMP-2 on bone formation and osseo integration in different implant systems marrow concentrate in rabbit maxillary sinus grafting. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, after sinus-floor elevation. An in vivo study on sheep. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014 (Epub ahead of print) 38(8): 571e579, Dec 2010 Triplett RG, Nevins M, Marx RE, Spagnoli DB, Oates TW, Moy PK, et al: Pivotal, Hartlev J, Kohberg P, Ahlmann S, et al: Patient satisfaction and esthetic outcome randomized, parallel evaluation of recombinant human bone morphogenetic after immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants protein-2/absorbable collagen sponge and autogenous bone graft for maxillary involving a definitive individual abutment. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2013 (Epub sinus floor augmentation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67(9): 1947e1960, Sep 2009 Vance GS, Greenwell H, Miller RL, et al: Comparison of an allograft in an experi- Jeong SM, Lee CU, Son JS, Oh JH, Fang Y, Choi BH: Simultaneous sinus lift and mental putty carrier and a bovine-derived xenograft used in ridge preservation: a clinical and histologic study in humans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19: J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2014 (Epub ahead of print) Kfir E, Goldstein M, Rafaelov R, et al: Minimally invasive antral membrane balloon Wagenberg B, Froum SJ: A retrospective study of 1925 consecutively placed im- elevation in the presence of antral septa: a report of 26 procedures. J Oral mediate implants from 1988 to 2004. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 21(1): Implantol 35: 257e267, 2009a Kfir E, Goldstein M, Yerushalmi I, et al: Minimally invasive antral membrane balloon Xuan F, Lee CU, Son JS, Jeong SM, Choi BH: A comparative study of the regenerative elevation - results of a multicenter registry. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res effect of sinus bone grafting with platelet-rich fibrin-mixed Bio-Oss® and 11(Suppl. 1): e83ee91, 2009b commercial fibrin-mixed Bio-Oss®: an experimental study. J Craniomaxillofac Kfir E, Kfir V, Eliav E, Kaluski E: Minimally invasive antral membrane balloon Surg 42(4): e47ee50, Jun 2014 elevation: report of 36 procedures. J Periodontol 78: 2032e2035, 2007 Please cite this article in press as: Kher U, et al., A clinical and radiographic case series of implants placed with the simplified minimally invasive antral membrane elevation technique in the posterior maxilla, Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.08.005

Source: http://imparteducation.in/downloads1/Udata/JCMFS%20Indirect%20lift.pdf

milne.ruc.dk

- I, OM OG MED MATEMATIK OG FYSIK I, OM OG MED MATEMA Semi-Mechanistic Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Modelling of a Novel Human Recombinant Follicle Stimulating Hormone Trine Høyer Rose Roskilde University Department of Science and Environment nr. 502 - 2016 DK - 4000 Roskilde Roskilde University,