Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Dental implants

Minimally invasive advantage? Patient feedback supports osseodensification in sinus lift surgery

Abstract

A Commentary on

Gaspar J, Botelho J, Proença L et al.

Osseodensification versus lateral window technique for sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement: a randomized clinical trial on patient-reported outcome measures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2024; 26: 113–126.

Study design

A randomized, controlled, parallel-arm clinical trial.

Objective

To compare patient-reported and surgical outcomes between osseodensification (OD) and lateral window (LW) techniques for sinus floor elevation (SFE) with concurrent implant placement.

Patients and methods

The study received approval from the local Ethics Committee, followed the Helsinki Declaration and CONSORT guidelines, and obtained written informed consent from all participants. Eligibility criteria included adults aged 18 or older, in good systemic health, with a missing posterior maxillary tooth, residual bone height (RBH) ≤ 4 mm, and crestal bone width >6 mm. Patients were randomly assigned to either the OD group or the LW group. Both techniques involved simultaneous single implant placement, and all surgical and prosthetic procedures were performed by one experienced clinician. Primary outcomes were pain (measured on a visual analogue scale), and quality of life (QoL) using a modified Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) questionnaire, assessed daily for the first week postoperatively. Patients also self-reported symptoms like edema, hematoma, and epistaxis using a 5-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes included implant stability (ISQ), surgery duration, complications, and analgesic use. Follow up extended for 1 year.

Results

A total of 20 participants (8 males, 12 females; mean age 47.9 years) were included in the study. Up to Day 3, pain levels were significantly lower (p < 0.05) in OD group, which also had a significantly reduced average analgesic intake throughout the first postoperative week (p < 0.001) compared to LW group. The OHIP-14 total scores were significantly lower in OD group on all days except Day 5 (p < 0.05). The mean surgical time was significantly shorter in the OD group (33 vs. 71 min; p < 0.001). Additionally, postoperative symptoms and complications were significantly fewer (p < 0.001), and the ISQ at 6 months was higher in the OD group (p < 0.05). All implants were restored using screw-retained zirconia crowns, with a 100% success rate.

Conclusion

Both OD and LW techniques were effective for SFE with simultaneous implant placement in cases with RBH ≤ 4 mm. However, OD showed superior short-term outcomes, including less pain and swelling, faster surgery, lower analgesic use, and improved QoL measures.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Huwais S, Mazor Z, Ioannou AL, Gluckman H, Neiva R. A multicenter retrospective clinical study with up-to-5-year follow-up utilizing a method that enhances bone density and allows for transcrestal sinus augmentation through compaction grafting. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018;33:1305–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Huwais S, Meyer EG. A novel osseous densification approach in implant osteotomy preparation to increase biomechanical primary stability, bone mineral density, and bone-to-implant contact. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017;32:27–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fontes Pereira J, Costa R, Nunes Vasques M, Salazar F, Mendes JM, Infante da Câmara M. Osseodensification: an alternative to conventional osteotomy in implant site preparation: a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023;12:7046.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Pai UY, Rodrigues SJ, Talreja KS, Mundathaje M. Osseodensification - a novel approach in implant dentistry. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2018;18:196–200.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Gaspar J, Botelho J, Proença L, Machado V, Chambrone L, Neiva R, et al. Osseodensification versus lateral window technique for sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement: a randomized clinical trial on patient-reported outcome measures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024;26:113–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Majid OW. Slow drilling technique may enhance peri-operative patient-reported outcomes in dental implant surgery. Evid Based Dent. 2024;25:127–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Omer Waleed Majid.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Majid, O.W. Minimally invasive advantage? Patient feedback supports osseodensification in sinus lift surgery. Evid Based Dent 26, 123–124 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-025-01155-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-025-01155-2

Search

Quick links