4.5 Article

3-D based minimally invasive one-stage lateral sinus elevation - A prospective randomized clinical pilot study with blinded assessment of postoperative visible facial soft tissue volume changes

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY
Volume 42, Issue 6, Pages 890-895

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2014.01.006

Keywords

Minimally invasive implant dentistry; Patient centred outcome; Postoperative oedema; Patient morbidity; Optical 3D imaging; Sinus floor elevation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The purpose of this prospective and randomized clinical study was to assess differences in patient morbidity between minimally invasive lateral sinus elevation (study group, n = 14) and conventional one-stage lateral sinus elevation (control group, n = 12). It was hypothesized that trauma to soft tissue was reduced in the study group. Materials and methods: Optical 3-D imaging was assessed blinded on days 1 and 7 after surgery to determine the visible soft tissue swelling of the upper lip and cheeks. Postoperative pain and discomfort were evaluated by a visual analogue scale (VAS; scale 0-10). Results: Immediately and on day 1 after surgery, the study group patients rated pain and discomfort as 2.4 [SD 1.7] and 3.1 [SD 2.1], respectively, on the VAS; while, the controls rated 4 [SD 1.6] and 5.6 [SD 1.7], respectively. The mean facial soft tissue volume change, assessed on day 1 after surgery, was 5.0 cm(3) [range: 0.2-9.2] for the study group and 15.5 cm(3) (9.3-21.55) for the controls (p = 0.00). Conclusions: Despite the small number of patients in this prospective study, 3-D based minimally invasive one-stage lateral sinus elevation resulted in favourable patient morbidity with less postoperative visible facial soft tissue volume changes. (c) 2014 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available