Comparison between conventional and piezoelectric surgical tools for maxillary sinus floor elevation: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the performance of conventional rotative instruments and a piezoelectric device for maxillary sinus floor elevation surgery, and to assess whether application of a resorbable membrane reduces resorption of an augmented site in a randomized clinical trial. Materials and Methods: Thirty-six consecutive patients (59.2 +/- 10.7 years, range 3876 years) needing bilateral sinus floor elevation surgery agreed to participate in this study. In a parallel split mouth design randomized clinical trial, in which the allocation of the surgical technique to be used on the determined sites was randomly assigned, one site was always treated with conventional rotative instruments (control group) and the other site with piezosurgery (test group). In addition, in a random order, the grafted sites were covered with a collagen membrane or no membrane. After a healing period of 34 months implants were placed. Results: Comparison of clinical features of the test and control sites revealed no differences with regard to wound healing and complications (perforations of the sinus membrane) during or postsurgery (p=.458, p=1.0, respectively). A clinically insignificant, but statistically shorter operation time was observed when using conventional rotative instruments (11.1 +/- 2.4 minutes) than using piezosurgery (15.1 +/- 2.9 minutes; p