Hyaluronic Acid Versus Ultrasonic Resorbable XXXX Fixation for Space Maintenance in Non-Grafted Sinus Lifting.

@entity1 @entity5842 @entity7894 @entity604 @entity79
PURPOSE: An ultrasonic resorbable @entity7894 (SonicWeld, KLS Martin, M  hlheim, Germany) was compared with hyaluronic acid (Hyaloss Matrix, Anika Therapeutics, Bedford, MA) for their ability to maintain space in non-grafted sinus lifting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative split-mouth study was designed and implemented. Six @entity1 and 4 @entity1 were included (mean age, 56.7  yr). The primary predictors hyaluronic acid (HA) application and ultrasonic resorbable @entity7894 fixation (URPF) were coded as binary variables. The primary outcome variables were height of @entity604 ( @entity5842 ). Secondary outcomes were bone density and implant survival. RESULTS: The postoperative mean @entity604 was significantly higher than the preoperative mean @entity604 on the 2 sides (P < .05). Mean increases in @entity604 and @entity5842 on the URPF side were significantly greater than those on the HA side (P < .05). In total, @entity1 were treated with 40 implants. No type I bone quality was identified; 14 (35%) implants were inserted in type II bone, 22 (50%) in @entity79 (15%) in type IV bone. There was no statistically meaningful difference between the 2 sides for implant survival or bone quality. At 6  months, all implants were clinically stable and the definitive prostheses were functional, resulting in a survival rate of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: There was sufficient bone height to eventually place implants on the 2 sides in all @entity1 . The 2 techniques yielded predictable outcomes in implant survival and bone quality. However, @entity604 and @entity5842 were considerably greater on the URPF side.
