Ueno Daisuke, Kurokawa Takashi, Maruo Katsuichiro, Watanabe Tsuneaki, Jayawardena Jayanetti Asiri
Department of Implantology and Periodontology, Kanagawa Dental University, Graduate School of Dentistry, 3-31-6 Tsuruya-cho, Kanagawa-ku, Yokohama, Japan.
Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Implantology, Tsurumi University Dental Hospital, Yokohama, Japan.
Int J Implant Dent. 2015 Dec;1(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s40729-015-0018-y. Epub 2015 Jul 17.
Perforation of the Schneiderian membrane is the most common complication in sinus floor augmentation (SFA). When volume of grafting is qualified to prevent enlargement of the membrane perforation, lack of bone volume may occur in optimal site.
SFA was performed in sites #24 to 26 in a 63-year-old male. However, a 10-mm size perforation of the Schneiderian membrane occurred in site #26. Although the sinus cavity was grafted with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) after repair of membrane perforation, insufficient bone formation was observed on palatal and distal aspects of site #26 at 5 months after SFA. Although additional SFA was required for implant placement, it seemed to be difficult to elevate the membrane by a conventional lateral approach in the palatal aspect of the sinus floor (site #26). Considering the configuration of new bone formation, it was decided to perform the palatal antrostomy approach. The Schneiderian membrane was elevated without perforation, and the sinus cavity was grafted with DBBM mixed with venous blood. Two 12-mm long, 4.1-mm diameter implants were placed in sites #14 and 16. Four months after implant placement, abutment-connection surgery was successfully performed. The radiographic image indicated improved radiopacity, without obvious bone resorption in site #26.
The palatal window osteotomy technique could be considered as an alternative method for augmentation of maxillary sinus in cases where difficulty is encountered to elevate a membrane by a conventional approach (e.g., in cases in which buccal bone height is long).
上颌窦底提升术(SFA)中,施奈德膜穿孔是最常见的并发症。当移植量足以防止膜穿孔扩大时,最佳部位可能会出现骨量不足的情况。
对一名63岁男性的24至26号部位进行了上颌窦底提升术。然而,26号部位出现了10毫米大小的施奈德膜穿孔。尽管在修复膜穿孔后用上颌窦内植入脱蛋白牛骨矿物质(DBBM),但在SFA术后5个月,26号部位的腭侧和远中侧观察到骨形成不足。尽管植入种植体需要再次进行SFA,但似乎难以通过传统的外侧入路在上颌窦底的腭侧(26号部位)提升膜。考虑到新骨形成的情况,决定采用腭侧上颌窦开窗入路。施奈德膜被顺利提升且未穿孔,上颌窦内植入了与静脉血混合的DBBM。在14号和16号部位植入了两颗12毫米长、4.1毫米直径的种植体。种植体植入4个月后,成功进行了基台连接手术。影像学图像显示不透射线性改善,26号部位无明显骨吸收。
在传统方法难以提升膜(例如颊侧骨高度较长的情况)时,腭侧开窗截骨技术可被视为上颌窦提升的替代方法。