Skip to main content

Table 5 Correlation between the size of the Schneiderian membrane perforations and the failure rate of the implants placed below perforated membranes

From: Management of Schneiderian membrane perforations during maxillary sinus floor augmentation with lateral approach in relation to subsequent implant survival rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author/year Perforation size (in mm) Implant failure rate (in perforated membranes) Management of Schneiderian membrane perforations
Park et al. [4] <5
5-10
>10
0% (0 de 44) (not specified where each implant was inserted) Clot formation
Beck-Broichsitter et al. [47] <5
>5
1,09% (1 de 92) (not specified the size of the perforations where the implant fails) <5 mm: collagen membrane or fibrin glue or clot.
>5 mm: suturing + collagen membrane
Ferreira et al. [16] <5
5-10
>10
2.3% (6 de 266)
2.7% (4 de 150)
4.7% (5 de 107)
Collagen membrane + reabsorbable suture for all perforations
Öncü E et al. [19] <10 0% (0 de 15) PRF (<10 mm ⍉)
Froum et al. [48] <10 0% (0 de 35) Resorbable collagen membrane (<10 mm ⍉)
Oh E et al. [49] 5-10 3% (4 de 134) Resorbable hemostatic agente Surgicel© (small-moderate perforations)
Hernández-Alfaro et al. [50] <5
5-10
>10
2,86% (4 de 140)
8,11% (6 de 74)
25,14% (15 de 58)
0-5⍉—Collagen membrane or (please add "r") suturing
5-10⍉—Collagen membrane + laminar bone
>10 ⍉—Laminar bone, buccal fat pad, mandibular bone block