Assessment of dentists’ subjective satisfaction with a newly developed device for maxillary sinus membrane elevation by the crestal approach
By Young-Kyun Kim, Yong-Seok Cho, Pil-Young Yun
The purposes of this study were to assess the dentists’ subjective satisfaction with the crestal approach sinus (CAS) kit, a device for maxillary sinus membrane elevation by the crestal approach using a special drilling system and hydraulic pressure, and to summarize the subjective satisfaction of dental implants placed after a sinus lift procedure with the CAS kit.
Thirty dental clinicians who had experience with dental implant placement after a sinus lift procedure with the CAS kit from June 2010 to May 2012 were included in this study. The questionnaire for the evaluation of the dentists’ subjective satisfaction with the CAS kit was sent to the respondents and returned.
The questionnaire was composed of two main parts. The first part was related to the sinus membrane perforation rate. The second part was related to the dentists’ subjective satisfaction with the CAS kit.
Fig. 1. Panoramic radiograph in the first dental examination. The residual bone at the first and second molar parts on the left side of the upper jaw is estimated to be about 4-5mm high.
Fig. 2. A: initial drilling connected with the stopper. B: injecting 0.3-mL saline solution after inserting the hydraulic lifter to elevate the maxillary sinus membrane.
Fig. 3. C: filling the hole with bone graft material using the bone carrier. D: bone condenser with the stopper.
Fig. 4. E: bone spreader application F: implant placement.
Fig. 5. Panoramic radiographic findings at 6 months after application of the final prosthesis.
A total of 28 dentists answered the questionnaire. Among 924 implant cases, sinus membrane perforation occurred in 38 cases (4.1%). Among the 28 dentists, 26 dentists (92.9%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the CAS kit. In particular, 24 dentists (85.7%) reported that safety, cutting performance, and user-friendliness of the CAS drill were advantages of the CAS kit. However, 7 dentists (25%) did not routinely use the hydraulic lifter for sinus membrane elevation.
From the survey, it was shown that the respondents were generally satisfied with the CAS kit and that the cutting performance and safety of the drill component were considered strengths of the CAS kit.