Scholarlink

Objective <p>This randomized prospective clinical trial compared piezoelectric surgery (PS) and conventional rotary burs for lateral sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement in patients with limited residual bone height (4–5&#xa0;mm), focusing on intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.</p> Materials and Methods <p>Twenty patients aged 30–60&#xa0;years with 4–5&#xa0;mm residual bone height in the posterior maxilla were randomized into two groups: Group I (PS) and Group II (rotary burs). Both underwent sinus lift with simultaneous implant placement and grafting. Intraoperative parameters included membrane perforation, surgical visibility, and duration. Postoperative outcomes assessed pain, edema, epistaxis, mouth opening, bone height (CBCT), and implant stability (RFA).</p> Results <p>Membrane perforation occurred only in the rotary group (30%), without statistical significance. PS showed significantly better visibility and shorter operative time. In this borderline 4–5&#xa0;mm residual bone height range, both groups achieved successful augmentation with comparable postoperative recovery. Both techniques demonstrated significant vertical bone gain and improved implant stability over 4&#xa0;months, with no significant intergroup differences.</p> Conclusion <p>PS provides enhanced precision and a lower incidence of membrane perforation, though cost-intensive. Both techniques yield comparable early clinical outcomes, and technique selection should depend on anatomical factors, clinician expertise, and resource availability.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Piezoelectric Surgery (PS) Versus Conventional Rotary Burs for Sinus Floor Elevation in Borderline Posterior Maxilla: A Randomized Clinical Trial

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月29日

查看全文
  • Muskan Grover,
  • Amit Gupta,
  • Tushar Dubey,
  • Shayan Ghosh,
  • Sania Khalid

摘要

Objective

This randomized prospective clinical trial compared piezoelectric surgery (PS) and conventional rotary burs for lateral sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement in patients with limited residual bone height (4–5 mm), focusing on intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

Materials and Methods

Twenty patients aged 30–60 years with 4–5 mm residual bone height in the posterior maxilla were randomized into two groups: Group I (PS) and Group II (rotary burs). Both underwent sinus lift with simultaneous implant placement and grafting. Intraoperative parameters included membrane perforation, surgical visibility, and duration. Postoperative outcomes assessed pain, edema, epistaxis, mouth opening, bone height (CBCT), and implant stability (RFA).

Results

Membrane perforation occurred only in the rotary group (30%), without statistical significance. PS showed significantly better visibility and shorter operative time. In this borderline 4–5 mm residual bone height range, both groups achieved successful augmentation with comparable postoperative recovery. Both techniques demonstrated significant vertical bone gain and improved implant stability over 4 months, with no significant intergroup differences.

Conclusion

PS provides enhanced precision and a lower incidence of membrane perforation, though cost-intensive. Both techniques yield comparable early clinical outcomes, and technique selection should depend on anatomical factors, clinician expertise, and resource availability.