Ozyalcin Mehmet Safa, Omezli Mehmet Melih, Torul Damla
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ordu University, Ordu, Turkey.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025 Jun;27(3):e70044. doi: 10.1111/cid.70044.
The objective of this study is to explore how different external sinus lifting approaches affect perioperative complications and patient comfort.
This prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study was conducted with patients who were admitted for rehabilitation of the posterior maxilla and met inclusion the criteria. Sinuses to be lifted were randomized into three groups: piezosurgery with a surgical guide, a specially designed bur for lateral sinus lift, and conventional burs. Intraoperative complications, ease of access, and operation time were recorded. Pain measured with visual analog scale (VAS) and analgesic consumption were evaluated over 1 week postoperatively. Edema was evaluated preoperatively and on the 2nd and 7th postoperative days. Patient expectations, experiences, and quality of life with the OHIP-14 questionnaire were assessed preoperatively and on the 7th postoperative day.
30 sinus lifting procedures were conducted on 27 patients, comprising 16 men and 11 women. There were no statistically significant differences among the groups in terms of operation and osteotomy time, pain level, analgesic consumption, edema, patient experience, and quality of life (p > 0.05). However, significant differences were found regarding membrane elevation time (p < 0.05) and ease of access to the surgical site (p < 0.001) among the groups.
Piezo surgical approach assisted by a surgical guide appears advantageous in terms of operation time, surgical site accessibility, and quality of life. However, in cases where increased edema is expected, the use of specially designed burs for lateral sinus lift may be preferable.
ID: NCT06601816. This randomized clinical trial was not registered before participant recruitment and randomization (https://register.
gov/prs/beta/studies/S000EWSQ00000038/recordSummary).
本研究的目的是探讨不同的外提升窦方法如何影响围手术期并发症和患者舒适度。
本前瞻性、随机、对照临床研究针对因上颌后牙区修复入院且符合纳入标准的患者进行。拟提升的窦随机分为三组：使用手术导板的压电手术、专门设计的用于外侧窦提升的车针以及传统车针。记录术中并发症、操作便利性和手术时间。术后1周内使用视觉模拟量表（VAS）测量疼痛程度并评估镇痛药物的消耗量。术前以及术后第2天和第7天评估水肿情况。术前以及术后第7天使用OHIP - 14问卷评估患者的期望、体验和生活质量。
对27例患者进行了30次窦提升手术，其中男性16例，女性11例。三组在手术时间、截骨时间、疼痛程度、镇痛药物消耗量、水肿情况、患者体验和生活质量方面均无统计学显著差异（p > 0.05）。然而，在膜提升时间（p < 0.05）和手术部位的操作便利性（p < 0.001）方面，三组间存在显著差异。
在手术时间、手术部位可达性和生活质量方面，使用手术导板辅助的压电手术方法似乎具有优势。然而，在预计水肿会增加的情况下，使用专门设计的用于外侧窦提升的车针可能更可取。
标识符：NCT06601816。本随机临床试验在招募参与者和进行随机分组之前未进行注册（https://register.
gov/prs/beta/studies/S000EWSQ00000038/recordSummary）。
