Clinical Outcomes of Reamer- vs Osteotome-Mediated Sinus Floor Elevation with Simultaneous Implant Placement: A 2-Year Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: This retrospective study evaluated and compared the 2-year outcomes for sinus floor elevation performed via either an osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation (OSFE) technique or a reamer-mediated sinus floor elevation (RSFE) technique. Implant survival, as well as surgical and postoperative complications, were used as measures of comparison. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were analyzed according to defined inclusion criteria. Orthopantography was used to assess preoperative; immediate postoperative; and 6-, 12-, and 24-month postoperative bone level changes. Implant survival and the incidence of complications, including sinus membrane perforation, were evaluated using appropriate statistical tests. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2010, 126 implants were placed simultaneously with sinus floor elevation in 85 patients (n = 43 women and 42 men; mean age ± standard deviation [SD] = 58.1 ± 10.2 years). The OSFE procedure (control) was used to place 65 implants in 45 patients, and the RSFE procedure (experimental) was used to place 61 implants in 40 patients. The mean maxillary residual bone height was 7.1 ± 1.6 mm. Endosinus bone gains were 5.7 ± 1.5 mm and 5.6 ± 2.3 mm for the experimental and control groups (P = .164), respectively, and the 2-year survival rates were 98.4% and 98.5%, respectively. Although no significant differences were observed between the two groups, three (6.7%) membrane perforations occurred in the OSFE group, and none occurred in the RSFE group. Other postoperative complications, including nasal bleeding, postoperative headache, and dizziness, were documented in 7 (15.6%) of 45 OSFE cases and 3 (7.5%) of 40 RSFE cases. CONCLUSION: The results presented herein indicate that comparable survival rates were achieved for implants placed in conjunction with a reamer- vs osteotome-mediated technique. Therefore, RSFE is a reliable and predictable procedure for implant placement in the posterior maxilla, with a low incidence of complications.