Comparative Analysis of Survival Rate and Marginal Bone Loss of Dental Implants with One- or Two-Stage Maxillary Sinus Augmentation by Lateral Window Approach: 5-Year Retrospective Study.

Dong-Su Ryu, Jae-Kwan Lee, Heung-Sik Um, Jong-Bin Lee
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Survival Rate and Marginal Bone Loss of Dental Implants with One- or Two-Stage Maxillary Sinus Augmentation by Lateral Window Approach: 5-Year Retrospective Study.","authors":"Dong-Su Ryu, Jae-Kwan Lee, Heung-Sik Um, Jong-Bin Lee","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare survival rates and the marginal bone loss (MBL) of implants placed in patients with one-stage or two-stage maxillary sinus augmentation via the lateral window approach (MSALW) using only deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The dental records and radiologic data of patients who had implants placed with MSALW were collected. The patients were divided according to the one-stage and two-stage MSALW, and the survival rate of each group was measured using the Kaplan-Meier method. The MBL of each group was measured through periapical radiographs at each defined time period. Statistical analysis of the differences between groups was conducted through the log-rank test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Univariate and multivariate regression tests wereperformed to analyze the degree of influence the interested variables had on the implant survival rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in the 5-year cumulative survival rates between the one-stage and two-stage MSALW at the implant level (91.0% and 90.6%, respectively; P = .201) or at the patient level (89.7% and 89.7%, respectively; P = .330). There was a slight difference in MBL at the initial time point, but there was no significant difference for the total period (P = .289). Diabetes was found to have a negative effect on implant survival (P = .015; hazard ratio [HR] = 3.669).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no significant difference in the 5-year cumulative survival rate or the 2-year MBL of implants between the one-stage and two-stage MSALW using DBBM.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"40 2","pages":"197-206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare survival rates and the marginal bone loss (MBL) of implants placed in patients with one-stage or two-stage maxillary sinus augmentation via the lateral window approach (MSALW) using only deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM).

Materials and methods: The dental records and radiologic data of patients who had implants placed with MSALW were collected. The patients were divided according to the one-stage and two-stage MSALW, and the survival rate of each group was measured using the Kaplan-Meier method. The MBL of each group was measured through periapical radiographs at each defined time period. Statistical analysis of the differences between groups was conducted through the log-rank test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Univariate and multivariate regression tests wereperformed to analyze the degree of influence the interested variables had on the implant survival rate.

Results: There was no significant difference in the 5-year cumulative survival rates between the one-stage and two-stage MSALW at the implant level (91.0% and 90.6%, respectively; P = .201) or at the patient level (89.7% and 89.7%, respectively; P = .330). There was a slight difference in MBL at the initial time point, but there was no significant difference for the total period (P = .289). Diabetes was found to have a negative effect on implant survival (P = .015; hazard ratio [HR] = 3.669).

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in the 5-year cumulative survival rate or the 2-year MBL of implants between the one-stage and two-stage MSALW using DBBM.

侧窗入路一期和二期上颌窦提升种植体的存活率和边缘骨丢失比较:5年回顾性研究。
目的:比较仅使用去蛋白牛骨矿物质(DBBM)通过侧窗方法(MSALW)进行一期或二期上颌窦增量术的患者植入种植体的存活率和边缘骨损失(MBL):收集通过 MSALW 植入种植体的患者的牙科记录和放射学数据。将患者分为一期和二期 MSALW,采用 Kaplan-Meier 法测量各组的存活率。每组患者的 MBL 都是在每个规定时间段通过根尖周 X 光片测量的。组间差异的统计分析通过对数秩检验和单因素方差分析(ANOVA)进行。还进行了单变量和多变量回归测试,以分析相关变量对种植体存活率的影响程度:在种植体层面(分别为 91.0% 和 90.6%;P = 0.201)或患者层面(分别为 89.7% 和 89.7%;P = 0.330),一段式和两段式 MSALW 的 5 年累积存活率没有明显差异。初始时间点的 MBL 略有不同,但在整个时间段内没有显著差异(P = .289)。糖尿病对植入物存活率有负面影响(P = .015;危险比 [HR] = 3.669):结论:使用 DBBM 的一期 MSALW 和二期 MSALW 在种植体的 5 年累积存活率或 2 年 MBL 方面没有明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信