Potential risk factors for maxillary sinus membrane perforation and treatment outcome analysis
Corresponding Author
Saša Marin DDS
Department of Oral Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Banja Luka, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Correspondence
Saša Marin, Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Billrothgasse 4, A-8010 Graz, Austria.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorBarbara Kirnbauer DDS
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorPetra Rugani DDS
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorMichael Payer MD, DDS, PhD
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorNorbert Jakse MD, DDS, PhD
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Saša Marin DDS
Department of Oral Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Banja Luka, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Correspondence
Saša Marin, Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Billrothgasse 4, A-8010 Graz, Austria.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorBarbara Kirnbauer DDS
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorPetra Rugani DDS
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorMichael Payer MD, DDS, PhD
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorNorbert Jakse MD, DDS, PhD
Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Department of Dental Medicine and Oral Health, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Background
Most common complication of sinus floor elevation (SFE) is sinus membrane perforation (SMP).
Purpose
To investigate the correlation between SMP and potential risk factors and to evaluate SMP treatment outcomes.
Materials and Methods
This study included patients who had undergone a SFE at Division of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Medical University of Graz from 2013 to 2017. Analysis of patients' records and CBCT focused on patient-related risk factors (sinus contours, thickness of membrane and lateral sinus wall, interfering septa, crossing vessels, former oroantral communication) and intervention-related risk factors (surgical approach, sides, number of tooth units, and sites). The outcome of SMP treatment was analyzed in the recalls.
Results
In all, 121 patients underwent 137 SFE. There were 19 cases of SMP (13.9%). Two significant factors were identified: maxillary sinus contours (P = .001) and thickness of the sinus membrane (P = .005). The sinus membrane perforation rate was highest in narrow tapered sinus contours and when the sinus membrane was thinner than 1 mm. Among 19 cases with SMP, no complications were seen upon recall.
Conclusions
Maxillary sinus contours and sinus membrane thickness seem to be relevant factors for SMP. Sinus membrane perforations were successfully treated by coverage with collagen membrane.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There is no conflict of interest in this study and it did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
REFERENCES
- 1Tatum H Jr. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dent Clin N Am. 1986; 30: 207-229.
- 2Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg. 1980; 38: 613-616.
- 3Danesh-Sani SA, Loomer PM, Wallace SS. A comprehensive clinical review of maxillary sinus floor elevation: anatomy, techniques, biomaterials and complications. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 54(7): 724-730.
- 4Zijderveld SA, van den Bergh JP, Schulten EA, ten Bruggenkate CM. Anatomical and surgical findings and complications in 100 consecutive maxillary sinus floor elevation procedures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 66(7): 1426-1438.
- 5Hernández-Alfaro F, Torradeflot MM, Marti C. Prevalence and management of Schneiderian membrane perforations during sinus-lift procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19(1): 91-98.
- 6Pikos MA. Maxillary sinus membrane repair: update on technique for large and complete perforations. Implant Dent. 2008; 17(1): 24-31.
- 7Schwartz-Arad D, Herzberg R, Dolev E. The prevalence of surgical complications of the sinus graft procedure and their impact on implant survival. J Periodontol. 2004; 75(4): 511-516.
- 8Anavi Y, Allon DM, Avishai G, Calderon S. Complications of maxillary sinus augmentations in a selective series of patients. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008; 106(1): 34-38.
- 9Harris D, Horner K, Gröndahl K, et al. E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry 2011. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration at the Medical University of Warsaw. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23(11): 1243-1253.
- 10Van den Bergh JP, Ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJ, Tuinzing DB. Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000; 11: 256-265.
- 11Shiffler K, Lee D, Aghaloo T, Moy PK, Pi-Anfruns J. Sinus membrane perforations and the incidence of complications: a retrospective study from a residency program. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015; 120(1): 10-14.
- 12Ella B, Noble Rda C, Lauverjat Y, et al. Septa within the sinus: effect on elevation of the sinus floor. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 46(6): 464-467.
- 13Rapani M, Rapani C, Ricci L. Schneider membrane thickness classification evaluated by cone-beam computed tomography and its importance in the predictability of perforation. Retrospective analysis of 200 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 54(10): 1106-1110.
- 14Niu L, Wang J, Yu H, Qiu L. New classification of maxillary sinus contours and its relation to sinus floor elevation surgery. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018; 20(4): 493-500.
- 15Geminiani A, Weitz DS, Ercoli C, Feng C, Caton JG, Papadimitriou DE. A comparative study of the incidence of Schneiderian membrane perforations during maxillary sinus augmentation with a sonic oscillating handpiece versus a conventional turbine handpiece. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17(2): 327-334.
- 16Shiffler K, Lee D, Aghaloo T, Moy PK, Pi-Anfruns J. Sinus membrane perforations and the incidence of complications: a retrospective study from a residency program. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015; 120(1): 1-4.
- 17Sj K, Shin SI, Herr Y, Kwon YH, Kim GT, Chung JH. Anatomical structures in the maxillary sinus related to lateral sinus elevation: a cone beam computed tomographic analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24(A100): 75-81.
- 18Pjetursson BE, Tan WC, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. J Clin Periodontol. 2008; 35(8 Suppl): 216-240.
- 19Von Arx T, Fodich I, Bornstein MM, Jensen SS. Perforation of the sinus membrane during sinus floor elevation: a retrospective study of frequency and possible risk factors. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29(3): 718-726.
- 20Becker ST, Terheyden H, Steinriede A, Behrens E, Springer I, Wiltfang J. Prospective observation of 41 perforations of the Schneiderian membrane during sinus floor elevation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19(12): 1285-1289.
- 21Yildirim TT, Güncü GN, Göksülük D, Tözüm MD, Colak M, Tözüm TF. The effect of demographic and disease variables on Schneiderian membrane thickness and appearance. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017; 124(6): 568-576.
- 22Pommer B, Unger E, Sütö D, Hack N, Watzek G. Mechanical properties of the Schneiderian membrane in vitro. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20(6): 633-637.
- 23Aimetti M, Massei G, Morra M, Cardesi E, Romano F. Correlation between gingival phenotype and Schneiderian membrane thickness. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008; 23(6): 1128-1132.
- 24Anduze-Acher G, Brochery B, Felizardo R, Valentini P, Katsahian S, Bouchard P. Change in sinus membrane dimension following sinus floor elevation: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24(10): 1123-1129.
- 25Pommer B, Dvorak G, Jesch P, Palmer RM, Watzek G, Gahleitner A. Effect of maxillary sinus floor augmentation on sinus membrane thickness in computed tomography. J Periodontol. 2012; 83: 511-556.
- 26Lin YH, Yang YC, Wen SC, Wang HL. The influence of sinus membrane thickness upon membrane perforation during lateral window sinus augmentation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 27(5): 612-617.
- 27Yilmaz HG, Tözüm TF. Are gingival phenotype, residual ridge height, and membrane thickness critical for the perforation of maxillary sinus? J Periodontol. 2012; 83(4): 420-425.
- 28Ardekian L, Oved-Peleg E, Mactei EE, Peled M. The clinical significance of sinus membrane perforation during augmentation of the maxillary sinus. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 64(2): 277-282.
- 29García-Denche JT, Wu X, Martinez PP, et al. Membranes over the lateral window in sinus augmentation procedures: a two-arm and split-mouth randomized clinical trials. J Clin Periodontol. 2013; 40(11): 1043-1051.
- 30Wallace SS, Mazor Z, Froum SJ, Cho SC, Tarnow DP. Schneiderian membrane perforation rate during sinus elevation using piezosurgery: clinical results of 100 consecutive cases. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007; 27(5): 413-419.
- 31Malkinson S, Irinakis T. The influence of interfering septa on the incidence of Schneiderian membrane perforations during maxillary sinus elevation surgery: a retrospective study of 52 consecutive lateral window procedures. J Oral Surg. 2009; 2: 19-25.
10.1111/j.1752-248X.2009.01038.x Google Scholar
- 32Güncü GN, Yildirim YD, Wang HL, Tözüm TF. Location of posterior superior alveolar artery and evaluation of maxillary sinus anatomy with computerized tomography: a clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 22(10): 1164-1167.
- 33Nolan PJ, Freeman K, Kraut RA. Correlation between Schneiderian membrane perforation and sinus lift graft outcome: a retrospective evaluation of 359 augmented sinus. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014; 72(1): 47-52.
- 34Nkenke E, Schlegel A, Schultze-Mosgau S, Neukam FW, Wiltfang J. The endoscopically controlled osteotome sinus floor elevation: a preliminary prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002; 17(4): 557-566.
- 35Falah M, Sohn DS, Srouji S. Graftless sinus augmentation with simultaneous dental implant placement: clinical results and biological perspectives. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 45(9): 1147-1153.
- 36Stefanski S, Svensson B, Thor A. Implant survival following sinus membrane elevation without grafting and immediate implant installation with a one-stage technique: an up-to-40-month evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017; 28(11): 1354-1359.
- 37Fouad W, Osman A, Atef M, Hakam M. Guided maxillary sinus floor elevation using deproteinized bovine bone versus graftless Schneiderian membrane elevation with simultaneous implant placement: randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018; 20(3): 424-433.
- 38Balleri P, Veltri M, Nuti N, Ferrari M. Implant placement in combination with sinus membrane elevation without biomaterials: a 1-year study on 15 patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012; 14: 682-689.
- 39Parra M, Atala-Acevedo C, Fariña R, Haidar ZS, Zaror C, Olate S. Graftless maxillary sinus lift using lateral window approach: a systematic review. Implant Dent. 2018; 27(1): 111-118.
- 40Jordi C, Mukaddam K, Lambrecht JT, Kühl S. Membrane perforation rate in lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation using conventional rotating instruments and piezoelectric device - a meta-analysis. Int J Implant Dent. 2018; 4: 3.
- 41Atieh MA, Alsabeeha NH, Tawse-Smith A, Faggion CM Jr, Duncan WJ. Piezoelectric surgery vs rotary instruments for lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of intra- and postoperative complications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015; 30(6): 1262-1271.
- 42Stacchi C, Andolsek F, Berton F, Perinetti G, Navarra CO, Di Lenarda R. Intraoperative complications during sinus floor elevation with lateral approach: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017; 32(3): e107-e118.
- 43Barone A, Santini S, Marconcini S, Giacomelli L, Gherlone E, Covani U. Osteotomy and membrane elevation during the maxillary sinus augmentation procedure. A comparative study: piezoelectric device vs. conventional rotative instruments. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19(5): 511-515.
Citing Literature
