Maxillary Sinus Augmentation Using Sinus Membrane Elevation and Peripheral Venous Blood for Implant‐Supported Rehabilitation of the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dental implants need appropriate bone volume for adequate stability in the rehabilitation after tooth loss. In the severely atrophic posterior maxilla, the clinical success of implant treatment sometimes requires a vertical ridge augmentation in the maxillary sinus floor. PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate a maxillary sinus floor augmentation technique using a replaceable bone window, elevation of the membrane, placement of implants, and injection of the patient's own venous blood to fill the voids. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six patients with need of maxillary sinus floor augmentation participated in the study. After preparation of a replaceable bone window in the lateral aspect of the sinus and careful elevation of the Schneiderian membrane, a total of 14 Brånemark implants (TiUnite, MK III, Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) were installed in the residual bone penetrating into the sinus cavity. The sinus cavity was then filled with peripheral venous blood and the bone window replaced and stabilized with a medical tissue glue (Aron Alpha A, Sankyo, Inc., Tokyo, Japan) to prevent blood leakage from the created compartment in the maxillary sinus. RESULTS: After a healing period of a minimum of 6 months, new bone was successfully generated in all 14 implant sites as judged from radiographs. One of the 14 implants failed, corresponding to a survival rate of 92.9% after a follow-up period ranging 12 to 34 months. CONCLUSIONS: The present case series demonstrate that the creation of a secluded space in the maxillary sinus and filling with venous blood results in bone formation at simultaneously installed dental implants over a 6-month period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".