PREDICTABILITY OF LATERAL AND TRANSCRESTAL MAXILLARY SINUS ELEVATION TECHNIQUES: AN INTEGRATIVE REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56238/arev8n3-045Keywords:
Maxillary Sinus Elevation, Bone Graft, Dental ImplantAbstract
Bone loss in the posterior segment of the maxilla is one of the main challenges for oral rehabilitation with dental implants, due to alveolar resorption associated with progressive pneumatization of the maxillary sinus. Maxillary sinus elevation, using lateral and transcrestal techniques, is a widely used strategy to enable the placement of implants in these conditions.This integrative review aimed to analyze the scientific evidence on the clinical and radiographic predictability of these two techniques.The search was conducted in PubMed, SciELO, and Google Scholar databases from 2019 to 2025, including randomized clinical trials, prospective and retrospective studies, and systematic reviews. Outcomes related to bone height gain, implant survival rates, and incidence of complications were analyzed. After applying the eligibility criteria, 15 studies comprised the final sample. The synthesis of the findings demonstrated that the lateral technique provides greater bone height gain but presents greater morbidity and a higher risk of sinus membrane perforation. The transcrestal technique proved to be less invasive, with a lower complication rate and implant survival rates similar to those of the lateral approach. It is concluded that both techniques are highly predictable when correctly indicated, and it is essential to consider sinus anatomy, residual bone height, and individual patient conditions when making clinical decisions.
Downloads
References
Bacevic, M., et al. (2021). Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of sinus floor elevation using the lateral window technique versus the hydrodynamic transalveolar approach: A preliminary randomized controlled trial. Clinical Oral Investigations, 25(9), 5391–5401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03847-2
Barros, M. S., et al. (2023). New perspectives about maxillary sinus lifting: A literature review. Archives of Health Investigation, 12(1), 26–32. https://www.archhealthinvestigation.com.br/ARCHI/article/view/5930
Bouwman, W. F., et al. (2025). Long-term bone height changes after sinus floor elevation with maxillary or mandibular bone grafts: A radiological study. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 27(1), Article e70008. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.70008
Cobo-Vázquez, C. M., et al. (2025). Clinical and radiographic evaluation for two crestal sinus lift approaches: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 11(1), Article 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00615-9
Decker, A. M., et al. (2024). Clinical and radiographic changes following transcrestal sinus augmentation: A scoping review of the last 25 years. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 26(6), 1338–1353. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13368 (or PubMed: 39350529)
Elfar, A. M., et al. (2024). Clinical and radiographic evaluation of transcrestal versus lateral sinus floor elevation: Randomized controlled clinical study. Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science, 27(4), 561–570. https://journals.ekb.eg/article_385425.html
Gaspar, J., et al. (2024). Osseodensification technique in crestal maxillary sinus floor elevation: Clinical and radiographic outcomes in atrophic posterior maxilla [Tese ou dissertação, Universidade de São Paulo]. https://repositorio.usp.br/directbitstream/7c7b3c24-7a40-4a61-96bf-01b39ccb0cc7/3236918.pdf
Gherlone, E. F., et al. (2022). Tilted implants and sinus floor elevation techniques: 4-year outcomes of implant-supported maxillary rehabilitation. Applied Sciences, 12(13), Article 6729. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136729
Iancu, I. A., et al. (2023). A systematic review of sinus floor augmentation complications: Does graft type influence the complications rate? Romanian Journal of Stomatology, 69(2), 70–76. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6c72/6d2706767f91f9a07047523612d10ea21f68.pdf
Jiménez-Guerra, Á., et al. (2025). Long-term clinical outcomes of transalveolar maxillary sinus floor elevation with rotatory instruments: An 8-year prospective study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(2), Article 365. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14020365
Kim, Y. J. (2025). Minimally invasive transcrestal sinus floor elevation in compromised maxillary extraction sockets: A case series. Journal of Implantology and Applied Sciences, 29(3), 156–163. https://www.implantology.or.kr/articles/pdf/xbDe/kaomi-2025-029-03-4.pdf
Lyu, M., et al. (2023). Maxillary sinus floor augmentation: A review of current evidence on anatomical factors and a decision tree. International Journal of Oral Science, 15(1), Article 45. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41368-023-00248-x
Mazor, Z., et al. (2024). Maxillary sinus membrane perforation rate utilizing osseodensification burs in transcrestal sinus floor elevation: A multicenter clinical study. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 26(5), 1023–1033. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13368
Schiavo-Di Flaviano, V., et al. (2024). Influence of Schneiderian membrane perforation on implant survival rate: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 13(13), Article 3751. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133751
Yang, B., et al. (2024). Association between sinus septa and lateral wall thickness with Schneiderian membrane perforation risk during lateral sinus lift: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS ONE, 19(8), Article e0308166. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308166
