We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Hyaluronic Acid Versus Ultrasonic Resorbable Pin Fixation for Space Maintenance in Non-Grafted Sinus Lifting.
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2016 March
PURPOSE: An ultrasonic resorbable pin (SonicWeld, KLS Martin, Mühlheim, Germany) was compared with hyaluronic acid (Hyaloss Matrix, Anika Therapeutics, Bedford, MA) for their ability to maintain space in non-grafted sinus lifting.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative split-mouth study was designed and implemented. Six women and 4 men were included (mean age, 56.7 yr). The primary predictors hyaluronic acid (HA) application and ultrasonic resorbable pin fixation (URPF) were coded as binary variables. The primary outcome variables were height of alveolar bone (HAB) and reduction in sinus volume (RSV). Secondary outcomes were bone density and implant survival.
RESULTS: The postoperative mean HAB was significantly higher than the preoperative mean HAB on the 2 sides (P < .05). Mean increases in HAB and RSV on the URPF side were significantly greater than those on the HA side (P < .05). In total, patients were treated with 40 implants. No type I bone quality was identified; 14 (35%) implants were inserted in type II bone, 22 (50%) in type III bone, and 6 (15%) in type IV bone. There was no statistically meaningful difference between the 2 sides for implant survival or bone quality. At 6 months, all implants were clinically stable and the definitive prostheses were functional, resulting in a survival rate of 100%.
CONCLUSIONS: There was sufficient bone height to eventually place implants on the 2 sides in all patients. The 2 techniques yielded predictable outcomes in implant survival and bone quality. However, HAB and RSV were considerably greater on the URPF side.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative split-mouth study was designed and implemented. Six women and 4 men were included (mean age, 56.7 yr). The primary predictors hyaluronic acid (HA) application and ultrasonic resorbable pin fixation (URPF) were coded as binary variables. The primary outcome variables were height of alveolar bone (HAB) and reduction in sinus volume (RSV). Secondary outcomes were bone density and implant survival.
RESULTS: The postoperative mean HAB was significantly higher than the preoperative mean HAB on the 2 sides (P < .05). Mean increases in HAB and RSV on the URPF side were significantly greater than those on the HA side (P < .05). In total, patients were treated with 40 implants. No type I bone quality was identified; 14 (35%) implants were inserted in type II bone, 22 (50%) in type III bone, and 6 (15%) in type IV bone. There was no statistically meaningful difference between the 2 sides for implant survival or bone quality. At 6 months, all implants were clinically stable and the definitive prostheses were functional, resulting in a survival rate of 100%.
CONCLUSIONS: There was sufficient bone height to eventually place implants on the 2 sides in all patients. The 2 techniques yielded predictable outcomes in implant survival and bone quality. However, HAB and RSV were considerably greater on the URPF side.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app