Clinical and radiographic changes following transcrestal sinus augmentation: A scoping review of the last 25 years.

Introduction: Maxillary sinus floor elevation is a surgical procedure intended to increase the volume of the bone vertically to accommodate dental implant placement. This intervention is frequently required for implant installation in the posterior maxilla, where the bone may be insufficient for securing implants of necessary length and stability. Sinus floor elevation can be completed either through a direct approach with a "window" through the lateral wall of the alveolar ridge or an indirect "transcrestal/transalveolar" sinus floor elevation (TSFE), which accesses the sinus floor through the crest of the edentulous ridge. Our study aims to provide a comprehensive scoping review of research conducted over the past 25 years on TSFE, specifically.

Methods: A literature search aimed at identifying pertinent literature for the purpose of this PRISMA-ScR-compliant scoping review was conducted. Only randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and case series that met the eligibility criteria were selected. Relevant data from these studies were extracted. Primary outcome measures included radiographic bone levels and implant failure >5 years. Secondary outcome measures included implant stability at time of placement and complications. Interventions reported in the selected studies were grouped based on treatment modality, which were then compared with the control therapy (traditional osteotome technique) after a minimum of 12 months healing period.

Results: Our search yielded 633 records, and after deduplication, 574 of these were screened. Application of the eligibility criteria led to the inclusion of 37 articles in the final selection. Case selection for included studies enrolling subjects: Four different transcrestal sinus elevation treatment modalities were identified: (a) osteotome, (b) piezoelectric surgery, (c) osseodensification, and (d) hydraulic techniques. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, no superior approach for TSFE could be identified. Overall, all techniques demonstrated high implant survival rates.

Conclusion: Comprehensive understanding of the patient's medical history, available armamentarium, and post-operative complications/management strategies are all essential to the completion of a successful TSFE approach for implant placement in the posterior maxilla, regardless of the treatment modality used.