A 5‐year clinical and computerized tomographic implant follow‐up in sinus‐lifted maxillae and native bone

AbstractObjectivesThe present study analysed apical and marginal bone remodelling around dental implants placed in both maxillary (sinus elevated with particulated autogenous osseous graft) and corresponding native bone areas, with a follow‐up of 5 years. The clinical survival of implants was also observed.Materials and methodsIn this retrospective chart review, 27 patients were enrolled, with 55 dental implants inserted from 2000 to 2006, 26 of which were followed (one implant per patient); if required, patients were treated via sinus lift with autogenous bone and particulate technique. The internal controls were implants positioned in native areas beneath the sinus. Radiologic survey was assessed via computerized tomographic analysis measuring apical bone level (ABL) and marginal bone level (MBL), at 1‐ (T1), 3‐ (T2) and 5 years (T3), around implants (buccal, b; palatal, p; mesial, m; and distal sides, d). Clinical probing depth (CPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL) for all the four peri‐implant aspects were measured. Cumulative survival rate (CSR) and survival rate (SR) of implants were calculated. Significances for paired and unpaired comparisons were searched for.ResultsA significant degree of apical resorption was recorded between T1 and T3 for the mesial particulate group; again, a significant difference was discovered between the native and particulate procedures for mABL. A further feature was discovered for the particulate procedure, for which ABLs resulted negative at least for three of the aspects. Regarding MBL measurements, similar behaviours were revealed using time‐comparison analysis for the two procedures at the buccal aspect. Comparisons among diameters, irrespective of the procedure, showed that resorption times for the bMBL were shorter as the diameter of the implant became wider. The implant CSR was 92% in native areas (two failures/25 implants) and 93.3% in sinuses lifted with particulate bone (two failures/30 implants).ConclusionsThe results suggest that a protrusion of the implant apices into augmented sinus lift occurred, whereas the bone remodelling of the coronal areas was not influenced by the events in the maxillary sinus. A diameter ranging from 4 to 5 mm might better guarantee a conservation of marginal peri‐implant bone level compared with implants with smaller diameters.