One-Stage Lateral Sinus Floor Elevation Using Different Grafts: A Systematic Review of Controlled Clinical Trials.

Abstract

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess histological and imaging outcomes related to new bone formation around implants, inserted simultaneously with sinus augmentation, comparing different types of grafts. Systematic Review was carried out following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analysis (PRISMA), and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. LILACS/BVS, Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase databases, including gray literature and manual investigation, were searched to identify clinical trials reporting human histological and imaging data of bone formation around implants, inserted into the maxillary sinus at the same moment of the elevation and augmentation procedure, using several materials. Study selection, risk of bias (Rob 2.0 or ROBINS I), quality of evidence (GRADE), and data collection were performed by two independent reviewers. Of the 1101 potentially eligible articles, 44 were retrieved, 12 were assessed for eligibility and 5 were included in this systematic review (4 randomized and one controlled clinical trials). As a result, 130 grafted sinuses with 179 installed implants in 103 patients, aged between 24 and 79 years and followed up from 6 to 15 months, were analyzed. The heterogeneity between studies did not allow the data to be combined for meta-analyses. All graft materials proved to be viable options for the intervention. The use of BCP was related to higher bone-to-implant contact. All the assessed grafts are viable options for the intervention addressed. The use of some material is justified to maintain the sinus volume and allow bone formation in the apical site of implants under the sinus membrane. Longer chair time and the morbidity of the donor site should be considered when choosing autogenous bone. Synthetic biphasic materials can be selected for this intervention due to superior values of %BIC when compared to DBB.