» Articles » PMID: 39496988

The Influence of Suturing and or Gluing of Perforated Schneiderian Membrane During Sinuslift Procedure on the Outcome: a Retrospective Study

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2024 Nov 4
PMID 39496988
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The sinus lift procedure has become the most common method for maxillary bone augmentation. The most frequently observed intraoperative complication is the perforation of the Schneiderian membrane. Various treatment options have been proposed for managing these perforations, including the use of resorbable membranes, centrifugated blood products as PRF, or PRGF, suturing, and fibrin glue application. While long-term studies exist for the use of resorbable membranes to close perforations, there is limited data on the long-term outcomes of suturing or gluing the perforated sinus membrane. The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the long-term outcomes of suturing and/or applying fibrin glue to repair perforated sinus mucosa during sinus floor elevation procedures. Between 2005 and 2009, a total of 692 patients underwent 923 sinus lift surgeries, and Schneiderian membrane perforation occurred in 202 sinus floor elevations (21.98%) across 168 patients. The main documented causes of perforations, which ranged from 2 to 10 mm in diameter, were the presence of septa, followed by thin and adherent membranes. Of the perforations, 100 (49.5%) were treated with microsurgical suturing combined with fibrin glue, 78 (38.6%) were treated with fibrin glue alone, and 24 (11.9%) were treated exclusively with suturing. Sinus grafting was performed using autogenous bone in combination with a biomaterial, following the layering technique. All surgeries resulted in primary healing without complications, enabling all patients to undergo restoration as planned. The long term clinical and radiological evaluations of 44 randomly selected patients who followed the recall program up to 10 years post operative confirmed the effectiveness of this treatment approach.

References
1.
Schwarz L, Schiebel V, Hof M, Ulm C, Watzek G, Pommer B . Risk Factors of Membrane Perforation and Postoperative Complications in Sinus Floor Elevation Surgery: Review of 407 Augmentation Procedures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015; 73(7):1275-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2015.01.039. View

2.
Tukel H, Tatli U . Risk factors and clinical outcomes of sinus membrane perforation during lateral window sinus lifting: analysis of 120 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018; 47(9):1189-1194. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2018.03.027. View

3.
Jensen O, SHULMAN L, Block M, Iacono V . Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998; 13 Suppl:11-45. View

4.
Gehrke S, Taschieri S, Fabbro M, Corbella S . Repair of a perforated sinus membrane with a subepithelial palatal conjunctive flap: technique report and evaluation. Int J Dent. 2012; 2012:489762. PMC: 3398651. DOI: 10.1155/2012/489762. View

5.
Proussaefs P, Lozada J, Kim J, Rohrer M . Repair of the perforated sinus membrane with a resorbable collagen membrane: a human study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004; 19(3):413-20. View